search

yegor256 / qulice

Quality Police for Java projects: aggregator of Checkstyle and PMD
https://www.qulice.com
Other
301 stars 111 forks source link

Checkstyle will fail in HeaderCheck if header contains a a letter with acute sign #1045

Open fabriciofx opened 5 years ago

fabriciofx commented 5 years ago

I'm using qulice version 0.18.17 and Checkstyle fails if I'm using a letter with acute sign at header (HeaderCheck):

Checkstyle: C:\Users\fbc\workspace\fabriciofx\cactoos-jdbc\src\main\java\com\github\fabriciofx\cactoos\jdbc\package-info.java[4]: Line does not match expected header line of ' * Copyright (c) 2018 Fabrício Barros Cabral'. (HeaderCheck)

The LICENCE.txt file has the same string.

0crat commented 5 years ago

@krzyk/z please, pay attention to this issue

0crat commented 5 years ago

@fabriciofx/z this project will fix the problem faster if you donate a few dollars to it; just click here and pay via Stripe, it's very fast, convenient and appreciated; thanks a lot!

fabriciofx commented 5 years ago

@krzyk ping

krzyk commented 5 years ago

@0crat in

0crat commented 5 years ago

@0crat in (here)

@krzyk Job #1045 is now in scope, role is DEV

0crat commented 5 years ago

Bug was reported, see §29: +15 point(s) just awarded to @fabriciofx/z

0crat commented 5 years ago

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #1045; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

0crat commented 5 years ago

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #1045; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

0crat commented 5 years ago

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #1045; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

0crat commented 5 years ago

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #1045; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

0crat commented 5 years ago

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #1045; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

0crat commented 5 years ago

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #1045; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

0crat commented 5 years ago

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #1045; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

0crat commented 5 years ago

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #1045; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

0crat commented 5 years ago

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #1045; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)