for (int i = 0; i < 11; i++) {
      limiter.acquire(); // #7, showing off the warmup starting from totally cold
    }

    // make sure the areas (times) remain the same, while permits are different
    assertEvents(
        "R0.00, R1.38, R1.13, R0.88, R0.63, R0.50, R0.50, R0.50", // #1
        "U4.50", // #2
        "R0.00, R1.38, R1.13", // #3, after that the rate changes

    for (int i = 0; i < 11; i++) {
      limiter.acquire(); // #7, showing off the warmup starting from totally cold
    }

    // make sure the areas (times) remain the same, while permits are different
    assertEvents(
        "R0.00, R1.38, R1.13, R0.88, R0.63, R0.50, R0.50, R0.50", // #1
        "U4.50", // #2
        "R0.00, R1.38, R1.13", // #3, after that the rate changes

 *       String}.
 *   <li>{@code getElement} on a {@code Multiset.Entry<@Nullable String>} returns {@code @Nullable
 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},

 *       String}.
 *   <li>{@code getElement} on a {@code Multiset.Entry<@Nullable String>} returns {@code @Nullable
 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},

 *       String}.
 *   <li>{@code getElement} on a {@code Multiset.Entry<@Nullable String>} returns {@code @Nullable
 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},

 *       String}.
 *   <li>{@code getElement} on a {@code Multiset.Entry<@Nullable String>} returns {@code @Nullable
 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},

 *       String}.
 *   <li>{@code getElement} on a {@code Multiset.Entry<@Nullable String>} returns {@code @Nullable
 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},

The main logic with ADRs is to describe (architectural) decisions made:

* To provide best practices and solutions we (as the *build tool* team) want to promote.
* To avoid asking the same thing multiple times during code review.
* To explain *rejected solutions*, for now, and future development, in case they are proposed again.

ADRs can be written by any team.

import java.util.Set;

/**
 * Result of an upgrade strategy application.
 * Uses sets of paths to track which POMs were processed, modified, or had errors,
 * avoiding double-counting when multiple strategies affect the same POMs.
 *
 * @param processedPoms the set of POMs that were processed
 * @param modifiedPoms the set of POMs that were modified
 * @param errorPoms the set of POMs that had errors
 */

    }
  }

  /**
   * Returns an immutable multimap containing the same mappings as {@code multimap}. The generated
   * multimap's key and value orderings correspond to the iteration ordering of the {@code
   * multimap.asMap()} view.
   *
   * <p>Despite the method name, this method attempts to avoid actually copying the data when it is
   * safe to do so. The exact circumstances under which a copy will or will not be performed are