Can get stats on commits from commit messages (we could write a script that figures out what percent of commits are features, fixes, breaking changes, refactors, etc.)
Has the potential to make the committer more conscientious about their commits
Disadvantages:
Having the URL in the title of commit messages (as opposed to the message itself) makes following links really easy
It's a process change, so it requires a time investment to learn
Notes From 2022-07-14 Dev Meeting
* LM: Discuss Conventional Commits. Preview: https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0
- LM shared that style and we looked at his rosetta fork commits.
- SR: I’m accustomed to the workflow where the issue URL appears in the title, makes it easy to understand context and track links. I agree the imperative form is best, and I think many of us are using that.
- CK: Maybe this would be good to investigate after we are through our TypeScript ramp-up.
- MS: I agree it could make glancing through commits more readable. I also like the URLS in the title though. I like the classification label.
- SR: My current convention is to put a terse commit message and if there is elaboration, then it goes in the corresponding issue. I have also seen developers tack on comments to a GitHub commit page.
- JO: I’m mixed but I see advantage in the label and short message format. But the tooling difference is significant–I like the URL linkability.
- MK: I’m a fan of making smaller more focused commits where the commit message is focused and relevant to the entire commit.
- KP: I would like to move toward supporting the changelog, if this can help us that would be great! But let’s revisit after CM vacation, and discuss further.
- LM: I’ll create an issue. We agreed to put it in the tasks repo, partly because that is where https://github.com/phetsims/tasks/issues/1084 is.
Template and Example
### Template
```
# ================================================
# Subject 50 CHARACTERS HERE ^
#
# ():
#
#
#
#
In the 2022-07-14 dev meeting, we discussed using something like Conventional Commits to standardize our commit messages. See also https://github.com/angular/angular/blob/22b96b9/CONTRIBUTING.md#-commit-message-guidelines and https://commit.style for more ideas.
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
Notes From 2022-07-14 Dev Meeting
* LM: Discuss Conventional Commits. Preview: https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0 - LM shared that style and we looked at his rosetta fork commits. - SR: I’m accustomed to the workflow where the issue URL appears in the title, makes it easy to understand context and track links. I agree the imperative form is best, and I think many of us are using that. - CK: Maybe this would be good to investigate after we are through our TypeScript ramp-up. - MS: I agree it could make glancing through commits more readable. I also like the URLS in the title though. I like the classification label. - SR: My current convention is to put a terse commit message and if there is elaboration, then it goes in the corresponding issue. I have also seen developers tack on comments to a GitHub commit page. - JO: I’m mixed but I see advantage in the label and short message format. But the tooling difference is significant–I like the URL linkability. - MK: I’m a fan of making smaller more focused commits where the commit message is focused and relevant to the entire commit. - KP: I would like to move toward supporting the changelog, if this can help us that would be great! But let’s revisit after CM vacation, and discuss further. - LM: I’ll create an issue. We agreed to put it in the tasks repo, partly because that is where https://github.com/phetsims/tasks/issues/1084 is.Template and Example
### Template ``` # ================================================ # Subject 50 CHARACTERS HERE ^ # #