=== ":material-language-kotlin: Kotlin"
    ```kotlin
      private val client = OkHttpClient()

      fun run() {
        val request = Request.Builder()

* To explain *rejected solutions*, for now, and future development, in case they are proposed again.

ADRs can be written by any team.
Like code, they should be reviewed by any other relevant teams.
The goal is not to *own* a decision, but to *share* it with other teams, and improve the build tool together.

### Format

The format for ADR should follow this template:

```markdown
# ADR-000X - Title

## Date

20YY-MM-DD

    assert response.json() == {"detail": "Not authenticated"}


def test_security_http_digest_incorrect_scheme_credentials():
    response = client.get(
        "/users/me", headers={"Authorization": "Other invalidauthorization"}
    )
    assert response.status_code == 403, response.text
    assert response.json() == {"detail": "Invalid authentication credentials"}


def test_openapi_schema():

sdist/
var/
wheels/
*.egg-info/
.installed.cfg
*.egg
MANIFEST

# PyInstaller
#  Usually these files are written by a python script from a template
#  before PyInstaller builds the exe, so as to inject date/other infos into it.
*.manifest
*.spec

# Installer logs
pip-log.txt
pip-delete-this-directory.txt

# Unit test / coverage reports
htmlcov/
.tox/
.coverage
.coverage.*
.cache
nosetests.xml

 * whenever there is a chance the check may fail "in real life". Example:
 *
 * <pre>{@code
 * Bill bill = remoteService.getLastUnpaidBill();
 *
 * // In case bug 12345 happens again we'd rather just die
 * Verify.verify(bill.status() == Status.UNPAID,
 *     "Unexpected bill status: %s", bill.status());
 * }</pre>
 *
 * <h3>Comparison to alternatives</h3>
 *

		expectedOpType:                    replication.ObjectReplicationType,
		expectedAction:                    replicateAll,
	},
	{ // 3. replication completed to single target; failed to another
		name: "replication completed to single target",
		tgtInfos: []replicatedTargetInfo{
			{
				Arn:                   "arn1",
				Size:                  249,
				PrevReplicationStatus: replication.Pending,

   */
  // TODO(user): Evaluate whether it makes sense to always piggyback the computation of a
  // HashCode on an existing OutputStream, compared to creating a separate OutputStream that could
  // be (optionally) be combined with another if needed (with something like
  // MultiplexingOutputStream).
  public HashingOutputStream(HashFunction hashFunction, OutputStream out) {
    super(checkNotNull(out));
    this.hasher = checkNotNull(hashFunction.newHasher());

import com.google.common.collect.ImmutableMap;
import com.google.errorprone.annotations.CanIgnoreReturnValue;
import java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException;

/**
 * A cache which forwards all its method calls to another cache. Subclasses should override one or
 * more methods to modify the behavior of the backing cache as desired per the <a
 * href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decorator_pattern">decorator pattern</a>.
 *

  skipApprovalScreen: false
  # If only one authentication method is enabled, the default behavior is to
  # go directly to it. For connected IdPs, this redirects the browser away
  # from application to upstream provider such as the Google login page
  alwaysShowLoginScreen: false
  # Uncommend the passwordConnector to use a specific connector for password grants
  passwordConnector: local

**Describe alternatives you've considered**
A clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features you've considered.

**Additional context**