Skip to content
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

Chore: document conventional commits #4188

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 18, 2023

Conversation

drewbo
Copy link
Contributor

@drewbo drewbo commented Jul 12, 2023

Changes proposed in this pull request:

security considerations

None

@drewbo drewbo force-pushed the chore-document-conventional-commits-2230 branch 2 times, most recently from cf3f769 to 663a99a Compare July 12, 2023 21:27
@drewbo
Copy link
Contributor Author

drewbo commented Jul 12, 2023

Note that the only "truly new" portion of this PR is the bottom section of the new DEVELOPMENT.md document

@drewbo drewbo requested a review from a team July 12, 2023 21:41
apburnes
apburnes previously approved these changes Jul 13, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@apburnes apburnes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

📝

@drewbo drewbo force-pushed the chore-document-conventional-commits-2230 branch 2 times, most recently from cf3f769 to ed39709 Compare July 13, 2023 19:15
DEVELOPMENT.md Outdated

## Commits, Releases, and Deployment

All commit messages on the default branch should follow the [Conventional Commits](https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/) specification. In addition, an associated ticket number should be added where relevant. Examples:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's not that unusual for one of our commits to need to reference a ticket on one of our other GitHub repos. Should this perhaps clarify what those should look like?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For example, the runbook I just did was a ticket on this repo, but the implementation was a commit to a different repo.

Copy link
Contributor

@svenaas svenaas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One copyedit and a few musings.

DEVELOPMENT.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
DEVELOPMENT.md Outdated

If you didn't follow this convention while making your commits locally or on a development, you'll still have (at least) two opportunities to edit the commit history to match the Convention Commits specification:
- while the code is on a non-default branch, you can perform an [interative rebase](https://git-scm.com/docs/git-rebase) to rewrite the history.
- prior to merging a PR, you can select either "Squash and merge" or "Rebase and merge" which will change the commit message(s) in the PR.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is confusing that both of these are characterized as merges whereas merge commits on the feature branch are not allowed. This isn't particularly friendly, but I'm not sure how to make it better.

@drewbo drewbo force-pushed the chore-document-conventional-commits-2230 branch 4 times, most recently from 3822624 to 97f96f4 Compare July 17, 2023 17:47
@drewbo drewbo force-pushed the chore-document-conventional-commits-2230 branch from 97f96f4 to 95fc76a Compare July 17, 2023 19:26
@drewbo drewbo force-pushed the chore-document-conventional-commits-2230 branch from 82fdd4e to 14147e1 Compare July 17, 2023 19:32
@drewbo drewbo merged commit e2b23e3 into staging Jul 18, 2023
3 checks passed
@drewbo drewbo deleted the chore-document-conventional-commits-2230 branch July 18, 2023 16:32
@drewbo drewbo mentioned this pull request Aug 1, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
3 participants