Skip to content
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

get rid of commitlint #543

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Aug 30, 2017
Merged

get rid of commitlint #543

merged 2 commits into from Aug 30, 2017

Conversation

ofrobots
Copy link
Contributor

We tried this experiment, I am not sure it is successful:
Too onerous. Unfriendly to non-collaborators. Doesn't work well with github squash and rebase workflow.

Opinions @GoogleCloudPlatform/node-team ?

Too onerous. Unfriendly to non-collaborators. Doesn't work well with github squash and rebase workflow.
@googlebot googlebot added the cla: yes This human has signed the Contributor License Agreement. label Aug 24, 2017
@kjin
Copy link
Contributor

kjin commented Aug 24, 2017

LGTM. We should still follow conventional commits, especially since we've already got the ball rolling... mostly. It should be possible today to write a GitHub integration to enforce this by failing a check if the PR's title doesn't satisfy conventional commits, since squash+merge'd commits take on the title of the PR itself. Enforcing the body is a little different issue... I've emailed GitHub support about whether there's a feature for Squash and Merge to take on the contents of the initial PR description.

So in short, I think we should still enforce this, but at the GitHub integrations level rather than at the git CLI level.

package.json Outdated
@@ -10,8 +10,7 @@
"changelog": "./bin/run-changelog.sh",
"coverage": "./bin/run-test.sh -c",
"bump": "./bin/run-bump.sh",
"closure": "./node_modules/.bin/closure-npc",
"commitmsg": "commitlint -e"
"closure": "./node_modules/.bin/closure-npc"

This comment was marked as spam.

This comment was marked as spam.

@AdriVanHoudt
Copy link
Contributor

@ofrobots
Copy link
Contributor Author

@AdriVanHoudt Thanks! The main challenge we saw was that commit hook time validation puts the burden on people trying to contribute to the repo. In reality the commit time message doesn't matter but rather the message we use at squash-and-merge time in GitHub, which does not get validated.

@ofrobots ofrobots merged commit 715f8cf into googleapis:master Aug 30, 2017
@ofrobots ofrobots deleted the bye-commit-lint branch August 30, 2017 23:00
@marionebl
Copy link

marionebl commented Oct 14, 2017

Sorry to read commitlint did not match your use case. Paul Irish recently started work on https://github.com/paulirish/commitlintbot. Have not tried it myself but it looks as if this could solve the Squash/Merge problem.


Edit: I am collecting ideas on how to improve the contributor experience over at https://github.com/marionebl/commitlint/issues/94. Your feedback would be greatly appreciated.

@kjin
Copy link
Contributor

kjin commented Oct 14, 2017 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cla: yes This human has signed the Contributor License Agreement.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants