3 ms·

I personally prefer conventional commits. https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/ https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/ The subject line says

I personally prefer conventional commits. https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/ https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/ The subject line says what the purpose of the change is (CI/CD, tests, bug fix, new feauture), what component it primarily focuses on, and then a plain text one line summary. For example: ci(GitLab): Add rust build directory to cache This should improve build times by caching most of the compile tree between builds. In testing, I’ve observed builds drop from 2m to 30s when scheduled on a node with a primed cache. It also forces me to keep my commits focused. If I can’t create a one line summary of what I’ve done, it probably needs to be broken up into multiple commits.

ericrallen 3y ago
Conventional commits are great, especially if you add in commit linting. Being able to programmatically increment semantic versions and automatically generate relevant changelogs is awesome. It’s also nice to implement Commitizen[0] for a little hand holding until folks get used to the linting. I used to care a lot about doing things the way that felt right to me, but now I just want some common standard that is easy for everyone to follow, easy to automate, and easy to verify programmatically. Things like conventional commits and semantic versioning aren’t perfect, but they are quite good and apply broadly to many use cases with common tooling and conventions. -- [0]: http://commitizen.github.io/cz-cli/ http://commitizen.github.io/cz-cli/
diarrhea 3y ago
But they’re not mutually exclusive. The two concepts play well together!
rzzzt 3y ago
I find the word choice for types "feat" and "chore" infuriating for some reason. Feat?!
- SergeAx 3y ago
  "feat" is something that adds value to product's end users. The things we put on release notes. "chore" is something that adds value to the engineering team. The things we have to do to keep being productive.
- pjot 3y ago
  What else would you suggest? Maybe “new” and “toil”
- bern4444 3y ago
  feat is just the short form of feature; chore is for annoying stuff like fixing lint issues or maybe package updates that don't require any code changes etc... those are the little chores we do to keep everything flowing.
  - rzzzt 3y ago
    It is irrational, but "feat" tells me the change is a marvel, something to be looked at. Webster says "an act or product of skill". Nah, it's a feature. "feat" sounds pompous. Shout it from the rooftops: everyone, this is a feat! Not a small feat. Aah. Feat. "chore" is too vague for me. A "feat" can be a "chore" if I don't want to work on it. "chore"-s like the one you describe are occasionally feats (the no-quote kind). Oh well.

ericrallen 3y ago

Conventional commits are great, especially if you add in commit linting. Being able to programmatically increment semantic versions and automatically generate relevant changelogs is awesome. It’s also nice to implement Commitizen[0] for a little hand holding until folks get used to the linting. I used to care a lot about doing things the way that felt right to me, but now I just want some common standard that is easy for everyone to follow, easy to automate, and easy to verify programmatically. Things like conventional commits and semantic versioning aren’t perfect, but they are quite good and apply broadly to many use cases with common tooling and conventions. -- [0]: http://commitizen.github.io/cz-cli/ http://commitizen.github.io/cz-cli/

diarrhea 3y ago

But they’re not mutually exclusive. The two concepts play well together!

rzzzt 3y ago

I find the word choice for types "feat" and "chore" infuriating for some reason. Feat?!

SergeAx 3y ago
"feat" is something that adds value to product's end users. The things we put on release notes. "chore" is something that adds value to the engineering team. The things we have to do to keep being productive.
pjot 3y ago
What else would you suggest? Maybe “new” and “toil”
bern4444 3y ago
feat is just the short form of feature; chore is for annoying stuff like fixing lint issues or maybe package updates that don't require any code changes etc... those are the little chores we do to keep everything flowing.
- rzzzt 3y ago
  It is irrational, but "feat" tells me the change is a marvel, something to be looked at. Webster says "an act or product of skill". Nah, it's a feature. "feat" sounds pompous. Shout it from the rooftops: everyone, this is a feat! Not a small feat. Aah. Feat. "chore" is too vague for me. A "feat" can be a "chore" if I don't want to work on it. "chore"-s like the one you describe are occasionally feats (the no-quote kind). Oh well.