Thanks Max! Agree with applying the same rules ( [type] [scope] summary) for writing issue titles.
On 2022/08/25 02:48:51 Max Xu wrote: > 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. > > >> > > > > > >
