Hi team Thanks for your feedback!
Here is the voting result: Our existing convention (customized based on Angular) is chosen! ~~~~~~ Our existing convention votes: 5, +1: Yu, Alex, Yunze, Jun, Qiang, 1, +0: tison Angular convention votes: 1, +1: tison ~~~~~~ I’ll close this discussion and initiate a discussion about another implementation detail in the next email. Yu On 2022/08/15 10:32:09 Yu wrote: > Hi team, > > Feel free to choose your desired convention **before EOD 8/16 (UTC +8)**. > > We'll close this discussion and move to the next topic after that time. > > Thank you! > > Yu and mangoGoForward > > On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 6:27 PM Yu <li...@apache.org> wrote: > > > 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 > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >
