See how a minor change to your commit message style can make a difference.
git commit -m"<type>(<optional scope>): <description>" \ -m"<optional body>" \ -m"<optional footer>"
Note
This cheatsheet is opinionated, however it does not violate the specification of conventional commits
Tip
Take a look at git-conventional-commits ; a CLI util to ensure these conventions, determine version and generate changelogs.
<type>(<optional scope>): <description> empty line as separator <optional body> empty line as separator <optional footer>
chore: init
Merge branch '<branch name>'
Follows default git merge message
Revert "<reverted commit subject line>"
Follows default git revert message
- Changes relevant to the API or UI:
featCommits that add, adjust or remove a new feature to the API or UIfixCommits that fix an API or UI bug of a precededfeatcommit
refactorCommits that rewrite or restructure code without altering API or UI behaviorperfCommits are special type ofrefactorcommits that specifically improve performance
styleCommits that address code style (e.g., white-space, formatting, missing semi-colons) and do not affect application behaviortestCommits that add missing tests or correct existing onesdocsCommits that exclusively affect documentationbuildCommits that affect build-related components such as build tools, dependencies, project version, CI/CD pipelines, ...opsCommits that affect operational components like infrastructure, deployment, backup, recovery procedures, ...choreCommits that represent tasks like initial commit, modifying.gitignore, ...
The scope provides additional contextual information.
- The scope is an optional part
- Allowed scopes vary and are typically defined by the specific project
- Do not use issue identifiers as scopes
- A commit that introduce breaking changes must be indicated by an
!before the:in the subject line e.g.feat(api)!: remove status endpoint - Breaking changes should be described in the commit footer section, if the commit description isn't sufficiently informative
The description contains a concise description of the change.
- The description is a mandatory part
- Use the imperative, present tense: "change" not "changed" nor "changes"
- Think of
This commit will...orThis commit should...
- Think of
- Do not capitalize the first letter
- Do not end the description with a period (
.) - I case of breaking changes also see breaking changes indicator
The body should include the motivation for the change and contrast this with previous behavior.
- The body is an optional part
- Use the imperative, present tense: "change" not "changed" nor "changes"
The footer should contain issue references and informations about Breaking Changes
- The footer is an optional part, except if the commit introduce breaking changes
- Optionally reference issue identifiers (e.g.,
Closes #123,Fixes JIRA-456) - Breaking Changes must start with the word
BREAKING CHANGE:- For a single line description just add a space after
BREAKING CHANGE: - For a multi line description add two new lines after
BREAKING CHANGE:
- For a single line description just add a space after
- If your next release contains commit with...
- Breaking Changes incremented the major version
- API relevant changes (
featorfix) incremented the minor version
- Else increment the patch version
-
feat: add email notifications on new direct messages -
feat(shopping cart): add the amazing button -
feat!: remove ticket list endpoint refers to JIRA-1337 BREAKING CHANGE: ticket endpoints no longer supports list all entities. -
fix(shopping-cart): prevent order an empty shopping cart -
fix(api): fix wrong calculation of request body checksum -
fix: add missing parameter to service call The error occurred due to <reasons>. -
perf: decrease memory footprint for determine unique visitors by using HyperLogLog -
build: update dependencies -
build(release): bump version to 1.0.0 -
refactor: implement fibonacci number calculation as recursion -
style: remove empty line
Click to expand
- Create a commit-msg hook using git-conventional-commits cli
- create following file in your repository folder
.git/hooks/pre-receive#!/usr/bin/env bash # Pre-receive hook that will block commits with messages that do not follow regex rule commit_msg_type_regex='feat|fix|refactor|style|test|docs|build' commit_msg_scope_regex='.{1,20}' commit_msg_description_regex='.{1,100}' commit_msg_regex="^(${commit_msg_type_regex})(\(${commit_msg_scope_regex}\))?: (${commit_msg_description_regex})\$" merge_msg_regex="^Merge branch '.+'\$" zero_commit="0000000000000000000000000000000000000000" # Do not traverse over commits that are already in the repository excludeExisting="--not --all" error="" while read oldrev newrev refname; do # branch or tag get deleted if [ "$newrev" = "$zero_commit" ]; then continue fi # Check for new branch or tag if [ "$oldrev" = "$zero_commit" ]; then rev_span=`git rev-list $newrev $excludeExisting` else rev_span=`git rev-list $oldrev..$newrev $excludeExisting` fi for commit in $rev_span; do commit_msg_header=$(git show -s --format=%s $commit) if ! [[ "$commit_msg_header" =~ (${commit_msg_regex})|(${merge_msg_regex}) ]]; then echo "$commit" >&2 echo "ERROR: Invalid commit message format" >&2 echo "$commit_msg_header" >&2 error="true" fi done done if [ -n "$error" ]; then exit 1 fi
- ⚠ make
.git/hooks/pre-receiveexecutable (unix:chmod +x '.git/hooks/pre-receive')
- https://www.conventionalcommits.org/
- https://github.com/angular/angular/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
- http://karma-runner.github.io/1.0/dev/git-commit-msg.html
Users are interested in logs. If they had appeared when they shouldn't, and now they don't, they should also be notified. This one is borders the fix tag btw.
Users themselves manage such config files, it is a primary feature. You are right I suppose about imperative present tense , I have been unable to get myself to adopt it for a long time for reasons beyond me.
My usage of behavior sort of begins where refactor ends. These changes were very much visible from the outside as users deal with configs themselves. But, with the behavior tag under my tool belt, I go beyond and apply the behavior tag for changes that are well below what's visible from outside. This allows me to have a smaller scope for refactor so that they are applied to changes where not even the internal API of the particular module had changed. "refactor" is overused imo.
I said what I said regarding this, could have been an "anti-feature" flag just as well as "feature". I'd rather not call such changes features. It comes across as misdirected, insincere, and reminds me of the tendency in management realm -- nowadays especially -- to prioritize sales over substance.