Feat: PR Title Validation

[sanmarg]

The purpose of this issue is to ensure that all pull requests (PRs) submitted to our repository follow a consistent and meaningful naming convention. This will improve the readability and maintainability of our project by making it easier to understand the purpose of each PR at a glance. I came across this project and was exploring it and had difficulty in understanding the PR's at glance So I wish to add this. Below is more information for it.

Problem:

Currently, there is no standardized format for PR titles in our repository. This can lead to confusion and difficulty in understanding the intent and scope of changes introduced by each PR. Inconsistent PR titles also make it harder to generate meaningful release notes and track changes over time.

Solution:

To address this issue, we will implement a GitHub Action that automatically checks the titles of PRs against a predefined format. This action will ensure that PR titles follow a specific pattern, making them more informative and standardized.

[dprotaso]

We have a pull request template here -
https://github.com/knative/serving/blob/main/.github/pull-request-template.md

[sanmarg]

Thank you, @dprotaso, for pointing out the existing pull request template. I appreciate the effort that has already gone into making PRs more structured. However, I've noticed that despite having a template, the PR titles still vary significantly, which can cause confusion and make it difficult to quickly grasp the purpose of each PR.

The GitHub Action I'm proposing would enforce a standardized format for PR titles, ensuring they follow a specific pattern. This would not only complement the existing template by adding an additional layer of consistency but also enhance the overall readability and maintainability of our repository. By having both a structured template and standardized titles, we can make it easier for everyone to understand and track changes at a glance.

[dprotaso]

Do you have an example? I don't necessary want you to do a bunch of work if we don't agree that the PR title formatting is a problem.

For now I think the PR body is more critical to have consistent than the PR body.

[sanmarg]

See the difference between the two:
For this Im choosing one of the other projects under cncf only ie. Argocd.

Here is the pull requests page for Argocd:

As you can see here the PR's are more readable and maintainable. It gives a clear review about what the person is willing to add...

Now have a look at our project:

I guess you can see the difference. If you consider this as a valid issue. I would like to work on it.

[dprotaso]

So in Knative we use prow which uses labels for these kinds of things - I think we have labels for the categorization you seem to want kind/bug etc.

I'd suggest you sync up with our productivity group (slack here https://cloud-native.slack.com/archives/C04LY4M2G49)

Whatever improvements we made we should probably do across the project and not just in the serving repo

[dprotaso]

Also using labels might help with release note generation in the future

see: https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/releasing-projects-on-github/automatically-generated-release-notes

[dprotaso]

Going to move this issue to the infra org since it's beyond the scope of this single repo

[dprotaso]

cc @upodroid @cardil for input