The GitHub Actions job "Comment commands" on texera.git/main has succeeded. Run started by GitHub user PG1204 (triggered by PG1204).
Head commit for run: 114a6100b53c1191a77b23b9b11221fd6607fef1 / Yicong Huang <[email protected]> docs: define how to pick a PR title's type and scope (#7427) ### What changes were proposed in this PR? `CONTRIBUTING.md` requires Conventional Commits but never says how to pick the type or scope, so recurring cases get decided ad hoc. This writes the convention down: - **Scope** names the module the change lands in (`amber`, `pyamber`, `frontend`, …), not an informal synonym; a cross-module PR is scoped to the module carrying the substantive change. - **Type follows the behavior**, not the diff size: - worked before, broken now → `fix` - adding or removing a functionality, or reworking one so that user-facing behavior intentionally changes → `feat` - leaves the user-facing behavior unchanged → `refactor` A `refactor` keeps user-facing API tests passing untouched; tests mirroring internals may be rewritten with the code. Behavior is defined by the code, so implementing something the docs claimed but never had is a `feat`. - **Tests**: a test-only PR is `test(<module>)`; repairing a broken or flaky test is `fix(test, <module>)`. - **Dependencies**: `fix(deps, <module>)` when the bump patches a CVE, `chore(deps, <module>)` otherwise. GitHub Actions bumps take `ci` as their module (`chore(deps, ci)`); a bare `ci:` is for hand-written CI and workflow changes. - **Backports**: a release-branch PR appends the version as the last scope component, e.g. `fix(deps, frontend, v1.2): ...`. On dependency bumps this documents what the automation already does rather than changing it: `.github/renovate.json5` types every routine bump as `chore(...)` and reserves `fix(...)` for `vulnerabilityAlerts`, and it opens GitHub Actions bumps as `chore(deps, ci)` where the docs said `ci:`. The old runtime-vs-toolchain wording governed only hand-written titles and disagreed with the bot on both counts; the docs now follow it. ### Any related issues, documentation, discussions? Closes #7393 ### How was this PR tested? - Documentation only — no code path changes. - Verified the new title forms pass the CI type gate and the review-time title check, both on `main` and with a version scope on `release/v1.2`. - Cross-checked every rule against the automation that consumes titles: `.github/renovate.json5`, `backport-auto-label.yml`, and `direct-backport-push.yml`'s title rewriter, which already emits the documented backport form. ### Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? Generated-by: Claude Code (Claude Opus 5) --------- Signed-off-by: Yicong Huang <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Copilot Autofix powered by AI <[email protected]> Report URL: https://github.com/apache/texera/actions/runs/31334091780 With regards, GitHub Actions via GitBox
