- Fixed `kubectl exec` usage string to correctly reflect flag placement. ([#77589](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/77589), [@soltysh](https://github.com/soltysh))
- Fixed `kubectl describe cronjobs` error of `Successful Job History Limit`. ([#77347](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/77347), [@danielqsj](https://github.com/danielqsj))

    [Debugger V2](https://www.tensorflow.org/tensorboard/debugger_v2), which
    reveals the details of the TensorFlow program including graph structures,
    history of op executions at the Python (eager) and intra-graph levels, the
    runtime dtype, shape, and numerical composition of tensors, as well as their
    code locations.

## Breaking Changes

      )
      .add(KotlinJsonAdapterFactory())
      .build()
  private val STORY_JSON_ADAPTER = MOSHI.adapter(Story::class.java)

  private val fileSystem = FileSystem.SYSTEM

  private fun readStory(source: BufferedSource): Story {
    return STORY_JSON_ADAPTER.fromJson(source)!!
  }

  private fun readStory(file: Path): Story {
    fileSystem.read(file) {
      return readStory(this)
    }
  }

- Fixes spurious 0 revisions listed when running `kubectl rollout history` for a StatefulSet ([#82643](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/82643), [@ZP-AlwaysWin](https://github.com/ZP-AlwaysWin))

Mas os detalhes entre *concorrência* e *paralelismo* são bem diferentes.

Para ver essa diferença, imagine a seguinte história sobre hambúrgueres:

### Hambúrgueres concorrentes

Você vai com seu _crush_ :heart_eyes: na lanchonete, fica na fila enquanto o caixa pega os pedidos das pessoas na sua frente.

  fun testRoundTrip(story: Story) {
    assumeFalse(
      story === Story.MISSING,
      "Test stories missing, checkout git submodule",
    )

    val newCases = mutableListOf<Case>()
    for (case in story.cases) {
      hpackWriter.writeHeaders(case.headersList)
      newCases += case.copy(wire = bytesOut.readByteString())
    }

    testDecoder(story.copy(cases = newCases))
  }

import okhttp3.internal.http2.hpackjson.Story
import org.junit.jupiter.api.Assumptions.assumeFalse
import org.junit.jupiter.params.ParameterizedTest
import org.junit.jupiter.params.provider.ArgumentsSource

class HpackDecodeInteropTest : HpackDecodeTestBase() {
  @ParameterizedTest
  @ArgumentsSource(StoriesTestProvider::class)
  fun testGoodDecoderInterop(story: Story) {
    assumeFalse(
      story === Story.MISSING,

import okhttp3.internal.http2.hpackjson.Story
import okio.Buffer

/**
 * Tests Hpack implementation using https://github.com/http2jp/hpack-test-case/
 */
open class HpackDecodeTestBase {
  private val bytesIn = Buffer()
  private val hpackReader = Hpack.Reader(bytesIn, 4096)

  protected fun testDecoder(story: Story) {
    for (testCase in story.cases) {
      val encoded = testCase.wire ?: continue

     * @return true is supplied scope is an inclusive sub-scope of current one.
     */
    public boolean encloses(ArtifactScopeEnum scope) {
        final ArtifactScopeEnum s = checkScope(scope);

        // system scope is historic only - and simple
        if (id == system.id) {
            return scope.id == system.id;
        }

        for (ArtifactScopeEnum[][] set : COMPLIANCY_SETS) {
            if (id == set[0][0].id) {

¡No! Esa no es la moraleja de la historia.

La concurrencia es diferente al paralelismo. Y es mejor en escenarios **específicos** que implican mucha espera. Debido a eso, generalmente es mucho mejor que el paralelismo para el desarrollo de aplicaciones web. Pero no para todo.

Entonces, para explicar eso, imagina la siguiente historia corta:

> Tienes que limpiar una casa grande y sucia.