Added version 10.x support

[almas]

Added version 10.x support

Just little bit improved and added @ThalianSvk's version 10.x support. But I don't fully tested it by myself.

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce to this software?

Put an x in the boxes that apply

• [x] Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• [ ] Documentation Update (if none of the other choices apply)

Issues closed by changes

List here all issues closed by your changes. Use a list of items like - [x] Close #0

• [x] Close #365

Checklist

Put an x in the boxes that apply. You can also fill these out after creating the PR. If you're unsure about any of them, don't hesitate to ask. We're here to help! This is simply a reminder of what we are going to look for before merging your code.

• [x] I have read the CONTRIBUTING doc
• [x] I agree with the CODE OF CONDUCT
• [ ] Lint and unit tests pass locally with my changes
• [ ] SonarCloud and Travis CI tests pass with my changes
• [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• [ ] I have added necessary documentation (if appropriate)
• [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

[louisjdmartin]

Thanks for your PR ! As we only support LTS version of sonarqube, we did not work on updates for SonarQube 10 yet. As sonarqube may change their API and some hidden stuff on major release, we can't merge it as-is, we should investigate impacts of such an update. But your PR is a starting point for us.

For example, CI throw this errors on tests:

expected<fr.cnes.sonar.report.exceptions.UnknownQualityGateException> but was<java.lang.NullPointerException>

Is this a behavior that as changed ? Is this a real NullPointerException ? We must investigate before merging :)

[Pexers]

+1 For SonarQube 10.x version support. 👍

[Topin2001]

Thank you for this work, it help me create the MR #397 . I've create a new one because too many change have been made since your MR. Be aware that this MR is only a draft and might not work as intented. Thanks again