* test with reference to the same "lock-like object", and then their interactions with that object
 * are choreographed via the various methods on this class.
 *
 * <p>A "lock-like object" is really any object that may be used for concurrency control. If the
 * {@link #callAndAssertBlocks} method is ever called in a test, the lock-like object must have a

            <multiplicity>*</multiplicity>
          </association>
          <comment><![CDATA[ This may be removed or relocated in the near
            future. It is undecided whether plugins really need a remote
            repository set of their own. ]]></comment>
        </field>
      </fields>
    </class>
    <class>
      <name>Activation</name>
      <version>1.0.0</version>

        ClassRealm projectRealm = currentProject.getClassRealm();
        if (projectRealm != null) {
            Thread.currentThread().setContextClassLoader(projectRealm);
        }
    }

    // TODO I'm really wondering where this method belongs; smells like it should be on MavenProject, but for some
    // reason it isn't ? This localization is kind-of a code smell.

    public static String getKey(MavenProject project) {

     * parameters, and as it turns out Firefox and Chrome actually do rather different things, and
     * both say in their comments that they're not really sure what the right approach is. We go
     * with Chrome's behavior (which also experimentally seems to match what IE does), but if you

![Swagger UI interaction](https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/img/index/index-03-swagger-02.png)

* Альтернативна документація API за допомогою <a href="https://github.com/Rebilly/ReDoc" class="external-link" target="_blank"><strong>ReDoc</strong></a>.

![ReDoc](https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/img/index/index-06-redoc-02.png)

### Тільки сучасний Python

     * extra state from AbstractFuture), our options are limited: A call to setException() would be
     * a no-op. We could log, but if that's what we really want, we should modify
     * AbstractFuture.executeListener to do so, since that method would have the ability to continue
     * to execute other listeners.
     *

### Check the code { #check-the-code }

* Check and read the code, see if it makes sense, **run it locally** and see if it actually solves the problem.

* Then **comment** saying that you did that, that's how I will know you really checked it.

/// info

Unfortunately, I can't simply trust PRs that just have several approvals.

	// target, we need to check if a configuration value has been set previously
	// to figure out if this is a valid create or update API call.

	// This cannot really error (FIXME: improve the type for GetConfigInfo)
	var cfgInfos []madmin.IDPCfgInfo
	switch subSys {
	case madmin.IdentityOpenIDSubSys:
		cfgInfos, _ = globalIAMSys.OpenIDConfig.GetConfigInfo(s, cfgTarget)

...would be run after the the response finishes sending the slow data:

{* ../../docs_src/dependencies/tutorial013_an_py310.py ln[30:38] hl[31:33] *}

But as `generate_stream()` doesn't use the database session, it is not really necessary to keep the session open while sending the response.

If you have this specific use case using SQLModel (or SQLAlchemy), you could explicitly close the session after you don't need it anymore:

            <multiplicity>*</multiplicity>
          </association>
          <comment>
            This may be removed or relocated in the near
            future. It is undecided whether plugins really need a remote
            repository set of their own.
          </comment>
        </field>
        <field xdoc.separator="blank">
          <name>profiles</name>
          <version>1.0.0+</version>