I don't want to read
gswallow opened this issue · comments
Create a chart rather than paragraphs of blah blah blah that I'm not going to read.
Tell me which words to use in my commit messages, without using too many words.
While the specification itself is reasonable in length, I do like infographics (everyone does — it only encourages adoption), and the types recommended by @commitlint/config-conventiona aren't included in the specification itself (which I think they should, despite being less important than fix and feat), and aren't even described at all (which I also endorse). Also, the specification itself should be more prominent on the website; it should precede the examples at the very least.
+1 for that priceless title
The spec could be left as-is, but I'm with @gswallow in wanting a chart, or at least something in tabular format. It could be in addition to, rather than a replacement for the spec.
I'm also a fan of infographics, although I'm trying to imagine what an infographic version of the spec would look like. A table is something I can paste locally (Markdown), even selectively. It could be a nice bit of copypasta to include in the hidden section of my/your repo's pull_request_template.md file.
The whole table is just:
| word | meaning |
|---|---|
fix |
like SemVer's patch bump |
feat |
like SemVer's minor bump |
| whatever you want | have fun with it |
Maybe also:
| word | meaning |
|---|---|
fix! |
like SemVer's major bump (bugfix vibes) |
feat! |
like SemVer's major bump (feature vibes) |
| whatever! | like SemVer's major bump (fun vibes) |
BREAKING CHANGE goes at the bottom.
Conventional Commits does not define any other words to use in our commits. It leaves the option to use other words so long as you stick to the format, and refers to one common convention as an example.
I was grumpy; I apologize for that.
I found a very helpful cheat sheet that I refer to:
https://cheatography.com/albelop/cheat-sheets/conventional-commits/
@gswallow great cheat sheet, thanks for sharing!
I would've gotten grumpy too. I think most of us come in thinking that "Conventional Commits" defines many commit types. If I was just trying to learn what those are so that I could get stuff done, I would've been equally frustrated.
I think adding a tiny chart to help digesting the spec would be helpful.
That's something we could add quite easily to the spec without any versioning changes.
Anyone in this issue wants to create a PR?
cc @bcoe
I think adding a tiny chart to help digesting the spec would be helpful.
@damianopetrungaro I agree, at work I try to distill conventional commits down to fundamentals when explaining it to people, i.e., most people only care about feat, fix, and occasionally breaking changes.
I'm an awful artist, do any contributors reading this thread have an idea for what a chart should look like?
@mentalisttraceur @gswallow @quadespresso if any of you know a designer (or you are good with it as well!), we're open to this idea.
Let me know!