<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same
    Java package; see

#      token: "Bearer xxxxx" # optional authentication token for the notification endpoint
#
#    retry:
#      attempts: 10 # number of retries for the job before giving up
#      delay: "500ms" # least amount of delay between each retry

`
	var job BatchJobRequest
	err := yaml.Unmarshal([]byte(replicateYaml), &job)
	if err != nil {

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same
    Java package; see

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same
    Java package; see

## About security, APIs, and docs

Hiding your documentation user interfaces in production *shouldn't* be the way to protect your API.

That doesn't add any extra security to your API, the *path operations* will still be available where they are.

If there's a security flaw in your code, it will still exist.

name: Bug Report
description: Something is not working as expected
labels: ["type=defect"]
body:
  - type: markdown
    attributes:
      value: >
        Thank you for filing a bug report. Please help us identify and resolve the bug by filling
        out the following fields. Before we begin, please make sure that the bug is still present in
        the [latest](https://github.com/google/guava/releases/latest) version of Guava available.

import java.util.stream.Stream;

import javax.naming.Context;
import javax.naming.NamingException;
import javax.naming.directory.Attribute;
import javax.naming.directory.Attributes;
import javax.naming.directory.BasicAttribute;
import javax.naming.directory.BasicAttributes;
import javax.naming.directory.DirContext;
import javax.naming.directory.InitialDirContext;
import javax.naming.directory.ModificationItem;

docker-compose -f docker-compose-site2.yaml up -d

./mc ready site1/
./mc ready site2/

for i in $(seq 1 10); do
	# mc admin heal -r --remove when used against a LB endpoint
	# behaves flaky, let this run 10 times before giving up
	./mc admin heal -r --remove --json site1/ 2>&1 >/dev/null
	./mc admin heal -r --remove --json site2/ 2>&1 >/dev/null
done

import java.net.CookieHandler

/**
 * A cookie jar that delegates to a [java.net.CookieHandler].
 *
 * This implementation delegates everything to [okhttp3.java.net.cookiejar.JavaNetCookieJar], which
 * conforms to the package-naming limitations of JPMS.
 *
 * Callers should prefer to use [okhttp3.java.net.cookiejar.JavaNetCookieJar] directly.
 */
class JavaNetCookieJar private constructor(
  delegate: okhttp3.java.net.cookiejar.JavaNetCookieJar,

Constructor injection is particularly concise in Kotlin:

```
class MyTest(
  private val server: MockWebServer
) {
  @Test
  fun test() {
    ...
  }
}
```

Multiple instances can be obtained by naming additional ones:

```
class MyTest(
  private val server: MockWebServer,
  @MockWebServerInstance("server2") private val server2: MockWebServer,
  @MockWebServerInstance("server3") private val server3: MockWebServer