Upgrade Guava 33.4.8-jre -> 33.5.0-jre

[Picnic-DevPla-Bot]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Type	Update	Change
Guava		minor	33.4.8-jre -> 33.5.0-jre
Guava	import	minor	33.4.8-jre -> 33.5.0-jre

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

[Stephan202]

Suggested commit message:

Upgrade Guava 33.4.8-jre -> 33.5.0-jre (#1869)

And drop some Refaster rules now covered by `@InlineMe` instructions.

See:
- https://guava.dev/releases/33.5.0-jre/api/diffs/
- https://github.com/google/guava/releases/tag/v33.5.0
- https://github.com/google/guava/compare/v33.4.8...v33.5.0

[github-actions]

Looks good. No mutations were possible for these changes.
Mutation testing report by Pitest. Review any surviving mutants by inspecting the line comments under Files changed.

[github-actions]

Looks good. No mutations were possible for these changes.
Mutation testing report by Pitest. Review any surviving mutants by inspecting the line comments under Files changed.

[github-actions]

Looks good. No mutations were possible for these changes.
Mutation testing report by Pitest. Review any surviving mutants by inspecting the line comments under Files changed.

[github-actions]

Looks good. No mutations were possible for these changes.
Mutation testing report by Pitest. Review any surviving mutants by inspecting the line comments under Files changed.

[Stephan202]

I missed the build failures 🤦. Added a commit to resolve them, and updated the suggested commit message.

[Stephan202]

/integration-test -> build ✔️.

[github-actions]

Looks good. No mutations were possible for these changes.
Mutation testing report by Pitest. Review any surviving mutants by inspecting the line comments under Files changed.

[Picnic-DevPla-Bot]

Edited/Blocked Notification

Renovate will not automatically rebase this PR, because it does not recognize the last commit author and assumes somebody else may have edited the PR.

You can manually request rebase by checking the rebase/retry box above.

⚠️ Warning: custom changes will be lost.

[rickie]

This means that the coverage for OpenRewrite is slightly less after dropping these, I think.

[Stephan202]

This means that the coverage for OpenRewrite is slightly less after dropping these, I think.

Yes, that's a trade-off. What I did here matches what we did earlier in similar situations, such as #1336. We could instead:

1. Reinstate the rules with a suppression (though I wouldn't want to indefinitely collect such "obsolete" rules).
2. Contribute these rules upstream to OpenRewrite.
3. (Longer-term) introduce an OpenRewrite feature that generates recipes from the @InlineMe directives extracted from a given JAR.
4. ... maybe something else ;)

CC @timtebeek for opinions :)

[timtebeek]

Fine to drop these refaster rules! On our end we've also adopted @InlineMe with generated recipes for an argument Guava version:
https://github.com/openrewrite/rewrite-migrate-java/blob/041816a8e62b89391d839775dcb863d2d516f585/src/main/resources/META-INF/rewrite/inline-guava-methods.yml#L18-L36

This means we can now convert between multiple minor/major versions of Guava even as they remove methods and their annotations.

• Generate recipes for Guava 33.5.0-jre openrewrite/rewrite-migrate-java#854

[github-actions]

Looks good. No mutations were possible for these changes.
Mutation testing report by Pitest. Review any surviving mutants by inspecting the line comments under Files changed.

[github-actions]

Looks good. No mutations were possible for these changes.
Mutation testing report by Pitest. Review any surviving mutants by inspecting the line comments under Files changed.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud