-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 293
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
docs: convential commits spec #1405
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ | ||
## Why | ||
|
||
Based on the established documentation around [Conventional Commits](https://www.conventionalcommits.org) and the recommendations made in [#1334](https://github.com/intuitem/ciso-assistant-community/issues/1334), we have decided to adopt this principle using the following guidelines: | ||
|
||
- Since v2, we have exclusively used squash merges, which has been beneficial so far. Therefore, we will continue to use this as the foundation for our workflow. | ||
- Semantic versioning is **mandatory** for Pull Requests, particularly the use of `!` for breaking changes. | ||
- Semantic commit messages are **recommended** for individual commits, as they will be included in the PR description after a squash merge. | ||
- Renaming PR titles is significantly easier than reworking commits. While we encourage all contributors to adhere to the convention, reviewers can make necessary adjustments as needed. | ||
- Reviewers must ensure consistency with the convention during the merge process. | ||
|
||
## Convention | ||
|
||
- Use lowercase for all commit messages. | ||
- Include a scope when relevant. For example, use `feat(lib)` when adding a new framework or library. | ||
- The following commit types are supported: | ||
- `fix`: Bug fixes | ||
- `feat`: New features | ||
- `chore`: Maintenance tasks or changes that don't affect production code | ||
- `refactor`: Code changes that neither fix bugs nor add features | ||
- `docs`: Documentation updates or improvements | ||
- `test`: Adding or updating tests | ||
- `ci`: Changes to the CI configuration or scripts | ||
- `build`: Changes that affect the build system or external dependencies | ||
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance convention details with additional guidelines.
Consider adding these important aspects of conventional commits:
BREAKING CHANGE: description
)📝 Committable suggestion