New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
About the meanings of "feat" #26
Comments
I think This is also why we don't include things like
You might wanna consider |
I am not too sure about using build, ci or chore for "unexposed /dev features". But, if feat is meant to be for product level only, then should we reflect this in the definition? feat: a commit of the type feat introduces a new feature edit: Look at this angular commit for example:
|
It is, indeed, a bit ambiguous about what
I agree. And I believe this was the original purpose too. Even with the angular team they are not writing the perfect commit messages. |
@stevemao How should we proceed? I think it would be nice to update the meaning on the website. In practice what I am doing right now in my repos is:
Possibly, I am thinking to introduce a type "internal feature for dev" to stay compliant with the original purpose. This is useful because shared modules / helpers are often in the same codebase but dev are not always aware they got a new tool to use and might reinvent the wheel. |
I would prefer to see something like I would argue that development features could be classified as enhancements. IMHO an enhancement classifier would help to bridge the gap between fix and feature. E.g. a fix indicates that there must have been a bug before. A feature indicates that there is some added functionality or business value. But often I find myself to commit changes which improve some situation but which neither fix a bug nor do they add a feature. E.g. performance usually is a non-functional requirement and can't be classified as a feature from a customer's perspective. Improving performance is usually more of an enhancement than a feature. |
We did it some days ago :D #25 ! Thanks to @about-code and @AoDev for the great idea! |
@damianopetrungaro Thanks to @blackxored and you for writing it into the spec! |
Hello, I am not sure it's the right repo for this. If it is not, please let me know.
I wish to understand better the semantics of "feat".
Regarding the "feat" keyword. I have trouble with it depending on the perspective.
There are two points of view: the product perspective vs development perspective.
Let's say a dev introduces a new cool reusable UI component.
feat(UI): add super new generic graph visualizer
Then later, this component is used to display some data.
feat(reports): display reports graph for x
Now, for a generated changelog, it's a bit of a problem because we are mixing "developer features" with "product features" and releases are unclear or with unnecessary information for people only interested in the "product features".
I was wondering how people make this difference and maybe clarify the semantics on conventionalcommits.org :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: