[hotfix][quickstarts] Fix misprints in DataStreamJob.java and DataStreamJob.scala

[snuyanzin]

What is the purpose of the change

The PR fixes 2 misprints in
flink-quickstart/flink-quickstart-java/src/main/resources/archetype-resources/src/main/java/DataStreamJob.java
and
flink-quickstart/flink-quickstart-scala/src/main/resources/archetype-resources/src/main/scala/DataStreamJob.scala

begining => beginning
fromSequece => fromSequence
(The existing method is called fromSequence

flink/flink-streaming-java/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/streaming/api/environment/StreamExecutionEnvironment.java

Line 1095 in d08a1d0

public DataStreamSource<Long> fromSequence(long from, long to) {

)

Verifying this change

This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

• Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): ( no)
• The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): ( no)
• The serializers: (no )
• The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): ( no)
• Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Kubernetes/Yarn, ZooKeeper: ( no)
• The S3 file system connector: ( no)

Documentation

• Does this pull request introduce a new feature? ( no)
• If yes, how is the feature documented? (not applicable)

[flinkbot]

CI report:

• 118bdcb Azure: SUCCESS

Bot commands

The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

• @flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

[flinkbot]

Thanks a lot for your contribution to the Apache Flink project. I'm the @flinkbot. I help the community
to review your pull request. We will use this comment to track the progress of the review.

Automated Checks

Last check on commit 2dfdda8 (Wed Dec 22 23:41:25 UTC 2021)

Warnings:

• No documentation files were touched! Remember to keep the Flink docs up to date!

_{Mention the bot in a comment to re-run the automated checks.}

Review Progress

• ❓ 1. The [description] looks good.
• ❓ 2. There is [consensus] that the contribution should go into to Flink.
• ❓ 3. Needs [attention] from.
• ❓ 4. The change fits into the overall [architecture].
• ❓ 5. Overall code [quality] is good.

Please see the Pull Request Review Guide for a full explanation of the review process.

The Bot is tracking the review progress through labels. Labels are applied according to the order of the review items. For consensus, approval by a Flink committer of PMC member is required

Bot commands

The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

• @flinkbot approve description to approve one or more aspects (aspects: description, consensus, architecture and quality)
• @flinkbot approve all to approve all aspects
• @flinkbot approve-until architecture to approve everything until architecture
• @flinkbot attention @username1 [@username2 ..] to require somebody's attention
• @flinkbot disapprove architecture to remove an approval you gave earlier

[MartijnVisser]

Thank you for your contribution.

The better the PR is, the higher chance it can be merged quickly. In this case, the PR is not completely following the PR guidelines (as can be found on https://flink.apache.org/contributing/reviewing-prs.html) and the commit message could also be better to meet the Code Style & Quality Guidelines, which can be found at https://flink.apache.org/contributing/code-style-and-quality-pull-requests.html.

[snuyanzin]

@MartijnVisser thanks for you feedback.
I improved the title, description and commit message. Please let me know in case I missed anything.

[MartijnVisser]

@snuyanzin Could you squash commits from your end?

[snuyanzin]

yes, sure, done

[MartijnVisser]

@snuyanzin Awesome, thank you. I'll wait for the build to turn green and then I'll approve it.

[snuyanzin]

@flinkbot run azure

[MartijnVisser]

@flinkbot run azure

[MartijnVisser]

Thanks for this. LGTM. @fapaul can you merge it?