LGTM. And I think we should also update our issue templates.
Best, Max Xu On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 6:04 PM Yu <li...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi team, > > Many thanks for your feedback! We've adjusted the convention based on your > suggestions! > > Below is a brief summary of what we have reached a consensus on: > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > 1. Convention > > Continue to follow our existing convention (it's customized on Agular) [1] > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > 2. Definition > > [type] must be one of the following: > - feat (abbr for "feature") > - improve > - fix > - cleanup > - refactor > - revert > > [scope] must be one of the following: > - admin > - broker > - cli (changes to CLI tools) > - io > - fn (abbr for "function") > - meta (abbr for "metadata") > - monitor > - proxy > - schema > - sec (abbr for "security") > - sql > - storage > - offload (changes to tiered storage) > - txn > - java > - cpp > - py > - ws (changes to WebSocket) > - test (changes to code tests) > - ci (changes to CI workflow) > - build (changes to dependencies, docker, build or release script) > - misc > - doc > - blog > - site > > For full details, see [Guide] Pulsar Pull Request Naming Convention [2] > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > If you have any concerns, feel free to comment before 13:00 August 25 (UTC > +8). > > We'll start implementing it if there is no objection after that time. > > Thank you! > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/90rcjf1dv0fbkb5hm31kmgr65fj0nfnn > [2] > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d8Pw6ZbWk-_pCKdOmdvx9rnhPiyuxwq60_TrD68d7BA/edit?pli=1#bookmark=id.y8943h392zno > > Yu and mangoGoForward > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 5:59 PM Yu <li...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hi Jiuming, Yunze, tison, > > Thanks for your vote! > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > Hi tison, > > > > > "packaging logics" > > > For example, build the docker image, build & publish shell scripts. > > > > If you refer to these changes, they belong to [build] scope. > > > > Yu and Zixuan > > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 1:25 PM tison <wander4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Yu, > >> > >> Reply inline: > >> > >> > Besides, the existing scope, [tool], refers to Pulsar CLI tools [1]. > >> > We're considering to rename it to [cli] since: > >> > >> Make sense. > >> > >> > "deployment logic" If so, can we ignore this? > >> > >> I saw you already remove [deploy] scope. No comment here. It should be > >> fine. > >> > >> > "packaging logics" > >> > >> For example, build the docker image, build & publish shell scripts. > >> > >> > How about defining [build] refer to the following? > >> > >> Make sense. > >> > >> > Two quick questions need your vote! > >> > >> To save letters, B & A. > >> > >> Best, > >> tison. > >> > > >
