Skip to content

Document switch to conventional commits - #88

Open
TEParsons wants to merge 2 commits into
psychopy:releasefrom
TEParsons:release-conventional-commits
Open

TEParsons wants to merge 2 commits into
psychopy:releasefrom
TEParsons:release-conventional-commits

Conversation

@TEParsons

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

@TEParsons
TEParsons requested a review from peircej September 18, 2026 11:06
@TEParsons

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@peircej just adding you to review to confirm that this lines up with what you're thinking for the new commit spec

@peircej peircej left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, subject to a couple of minor changes.
I think we should add:

  • breaking changes MUST contain a BREAKING CHANGE: footer and optionally the !feat. The use of the footer seems good in that the commit introduces one feature (that's in the title) but the side effect is described in the footer
  • possibly we also mention the use of (scope) to specify the area that this fixed like fix(app) or fix(lib). One suggestion elsewhere is to use a specific scope of reg to indicate fixing regressions (of unreleased changes). We could use that without the others even

Comment thread source/developers/repository.rst Outdated
* *chore*: Changes to processes, actions, etc. (devops stuff, basically)

.. note::
PsychoPy only recently (2026) moved over to Common Commits, so you may be familiar with our old commit message style. If you are, here is how the old tags correspond to the new ones:

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

typo - Conventional Commits not Common Commits

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So fix(reg) would be equivalent to the old FF tag? I'd be happy with that.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think I prefer ! for breaking changes as it means not having to look at the commit footers when compiling release notes (the script I've got just looks at the PR title), but I'm up for supporting both.

@TEParsons
TEParsons requested a review from peircej September 21, 2026 14:31

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants