Hi tison, Thanks for your suggestions!
> But following the Conventional Commits will ensure we can use the toolchain built around it, such as semantic release[1]. Our customized convention can use the semantic release tool as well. > Also, Conventional Commits have a standard to name a BREAKING CHANGE and a REVERT. We may or may not want it later, shall we customize it further then? - BREAKING CHANGE: yes, we can customize it based on Conventional Commits, eg, [feat][broker]! Add xxx - REVERT: [revert] belongs to [type] in our rule [1] We can change it if it does not make sense. I'll initiate an official discussion on these details and the definition of [type][scope] in another independent email. [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d8Pw6ZbWk-_pCKdOmdvx9rnhPiyuxwq60_TrD68d7BA/edit?pli=1#bookmark=id.y8943h392zno Yu and mangoGoForward On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 12:10 AM tison <wander4...@gmail.com> wrote: > To clarify, I don't have a strong feeling about either convention. > According to the reason above, I'd prefer the Angular convention, while +0 > for the customized convention. > > Best, > tison. > > > tison <wander4...@gmail.com> 于2022年8月14日周日 23:40写道： > > > Technically, the regexp of both conventions are: > > > > * Angular convention - /^(\w*)(?:\((.*)\))?!?: (.*)$/ > > * Customized conventions - /^\[(\w*)\](?:\[(.*)\])?: (.*)$/ > > > > So, there're technically equal from the customized convention > perspective, > > or the Angular convention contains all expressiveness of the customized > one. > > > > > It makes PR titles more clear and self-explanatory. > > It's subjective. As described above, the Angular convention contains all > > expressiveness of the customized one - it also has type and scope, and > > delimiter length is almost the same. > > > > Let's think of the adoption of each convention: > > > > 1. Customized conventions: better to follow for developers who already > use > > it. > > 2. Angular convention is a popular standard so that: > > (1) It's well-known by _new_ developers. Just tell them we are using > > Conventional Commits. > > (2) Better toolchain support. This time we're lucky > > that action-semantic-pull-request allows you to customize headerPattern. > > But following the Conventional Commits will ensure we can use the > toolchain > > built around it, such as semantic release[1]. Also, Conventional Commits > > have a standard to name a BREAKING CHANGE and a REVERT. We may or may not > > want it later, shall we customize it further then? > > > > +1 for Angular convention. > > > > Best, > > tison. > > > > [1] https://github.com/semantic-release/semantic-release > > > > > > Qiang Huang <qiang.huang1...@gmail.com> 于2022年8月14日周日 12:15写道： > > > >> I agree that the customized one is better. +1 on the customized one. > >> > >> Jun M <momoma...@hotmail.com> 于2022年8月12日周五 10:51写道： > >> > >> > +1 on the customized one. > >> > > >> > > >> > Cheers > >> > momo-jun > >> > > >> > > >> > >> -- > >> BR, > >> Qiang Huang > >> > > >
