3 ms·

>Use the present tense ("Add feature" not "Added feature") Agreed. >Use the imperative mood ("Move cursor to..." not "Moves cursor to...") Agreed. >Limit th

>Use the present tense ("Add feature" not "Added feature") Agreed. >Use the imperative mood ("Move cursor to..." not "Moves cursor to...") Agreed. >Limit the first line to 72 characters or less Agreed. >Reference issues and pull requests liberally Agreed. >Consider starting the commit message with an applicable emoji Fuck off. This is completely useless and doesn't deserve 14 examples when the above sensible directions are so brief.

eterm 12y ago
It's their project, if you want to contribute why not follow their guidelines? The emojii are just shorthands for [CodeImprovement], [Feature], or whatever you might otherwise tag commits as.
k2xl 12y ago
"Fuck off" - seriously? Why use such inflammatory language in your post. A simple "Disagree" would have sufficed. IMHO the tags are a quick way to filter commits by each of those. The images are just for quicker reference.
- Morgawr 12y ago
  How is "lipstick" and "checkered flag" a more appropriate tag than a more specific, less ambiguous and more concise technical word? Most projects already use tags like "FIX" "CHANGE" "NEW" etc etc, there really is no reason to use ambiguous emojis.
  - shawnz 12y ago
    These are small and coloured, so they're easy to see in a list.
    - Morgawr 12y ago
      They are definitely not small and coloured on my terminal screen. Maybe we should update git or github with proper tracking and tagging (wait, git already supports tags! But that's for a different thing anyway) instead of using something that was not intended for this purpose. Especially because, as I said, it's ambiguous and it really doesn't bring any benefit on the table.
- davexunit 12y ago
  >"Fuck off" - seriously? It's an exaggeration for effect (the downvote effect, I suppose), but recommending emoji as a commit log guideline is totally silly. I cannot take this document seriously.

eterm 12y ago

It's their project, if you want to contribute why not follow their guidelines? The emojii are just shorthands for [CodeImprovement], [Feature], or whatever you might otherwise tag commits as.

k2xl 12y ago

"Fuck off" - seriously? Why use such inflammatory language in your post. A simple "Disagree" would have sufficed. IMHO the tags are a quick way to filter commits by each of those. The images are just for quicker reference.

Morgawr 12y ago
How is "lipstick" and "checkered flag" a more appropriate tag than a more specific, less ambiguous and more concise technical word? Most projects already use tags like "FIX" "CHANGE" "NEW" etc etc, there really is no reason to use ambiguous emojis.
- shawnz 12y ago
  These are small and coloured, so they're easy to see in a list.
  - Morgawr 12y ago
    They are definitely not small and coloured on my terminal screen. Maybe we should update git or github with proper tracking and tagging (wait, git already supports tags! But that's for a different thing anyway) instead of using something that was not intended for this purpose. Especially because, as I said, it's ambiguous and it really doesn't bring any benefit on the table.
davexunit 12y ago
>"Fuck off" - seriously? It's an exaggeration for effect (the downvote effect, I suppose), but recommending emoji as a commit log guideline is totally silly. I cannot take this document seriously.