minor: corrected leading asterisks alignment in javadoc

[Zopsss]

Semaphore CI was complaining that some files in the sevntu repository needed to fix their javadoc's leading asterisk alignment based on the new check LeadingAsteriskAlignCheck

[Zopsss]

@romani I've fixed the PR title as sevntu-checks suggested but I'm not able to understand the other two CI failures

[nrmancuso]

@romani I've fixed the PR title as sevntu-checks suggested but I'm not able to understand the other two CI failures

Please share exact links to failures, failure messages, and what you have tried to do to fix them.

[Zopsss]

Please share exact links to failures, failure messages, and what you have tried to do to fix them.

The semaphore CI was giving me these two errors:

1. https://checkstyle.semaphoreci.com/jobs/8c9b91a4-2a3c-401d-99a7-037a149d3db2
   it suggested I need to make a PR at the contribution repo and add the link of it to the description, here is the link of it: add new check: JavadocLeadingAsteriskAlign checkstyle/contribution#848

2. https://checkstyle.semaphoreci.com/jobs/2733e0a7-c393-4f6c-b684-c8bae37bcc6a#L758
   this error was occurring because there were some classes in this repository which were not following the rule of the new check introduced. I tried to fix them in this PR.

now here 2 CIs are failing:

1. eclipse-analysis: I'm not able to understand it's error message.
2. sonarqube: it is giving me this error:-

[ERROR] Failed to execute goal org.sonarsource.scanner.maven:sonar-maven-plugin:3.11.0.3922:sonar (default-cli) on project sevntu-checks: The plugin [text] does not support Java 11.0.13: org/sonar/plugins/common/TextAndSecretsPlugin has been compiled by a more recent version of the Java Runtime (class file version 61.0), this version of the Java Runtime only recognizes class file versions up to 55.0 -> [Help 1]

I'm using following java version:

PS C:\Open Source\sevntu.checkstyle> java -version
java version "19.0.1" 2022-10-18
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 19.0.1+10-21)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 19.0.1+10-21, mixed mode, sharing)

@nrmancuso

[nrmancuso]

@Zopsss a good rule of thumb for CI: always compare your PR run to master.

[Zopsss]

@Zopsss a good rule of thumb for CI: always compare your PR run to master.

can you please elaborate more: comparing PR run to master ?

EDIT: I found a PR, which was about implementing a new check. Do I need to make changes to add support for the new check I implemented as done in the mentioned PR? I'm not so sure what to do

[nrmancuso]

“Compare your PR run to master” means to look at CI in this PR, and look at the CI in master, and compare them.

If the same failure exists, you can assume that the failure is not from your changes.

[nrmancuso]

Good stuff!