I don't think you should add the imports for the entire file. Several of these imports aren't even being used in the snippet that is requesting them.

One suggesting for handling this problem is the approach that's being used in #1232. This puts each snippet in it's own file, and the region tags include the imports.

Another suggestion is to add a comment detailing that the PemReader import is needed, and maybe even specify the mvn package name for the user to more easily add it to their pom.

We had a discussion about the best way to present these imports in b/113025156, and we decided the universal import region tag would be sufficient. Is it more standard to include imports in each region tag? I could do it that way, but it would require a pretty big refactor, and new PRs for the other languages

(btw, I changed the region tag here - these should be imports for all asymmetric samples, not just get_asymmetric_public)

Up until now the standard has been to not include imports in region tags. If we switch the new format, each snippet will be in it's own file so that only relevant imports will be shown.

What page will this be on? I don't think lumping all the imports into one region tag is a good solution for multiple different snippets - it won't be clear which imports go to which snippet.

It would have to be on the encrypting and signing docs pages. I think I'll spend some time tomorrow moving imports into each snippet, if that's more in line with existing ones

The other suggestion (if you want to avoid a large refactor until the new format is decided upon) would be to update the comment for the functions using the 3rd party library with just that import.

For example add something like this snippet uses BouncyCastleProvider, which can be imported at org.bouncycastle.jce.provider.BouncyCastleProvider to the function comment. This way the third party import would be visible and still only listed for the relevant functions.