Reason for rejected pull request on hacktoberfest: "wrong commit message"

...are you fucking dumb or what?

damn robot machine clowns, you wonder why you don't get better at your craft

"we love open source, making it so prohibitively convoluted to participate!!! why won't anyone contribute to our repo?!?!?!"

clowns, absolutely everywhere i swear

Just start passing these out.

jesus christ, there's a whole ORG around it: https://conventionalcommits.org/en/...

imagine not just coding all day but turning your commit message into a code language in itself. If this doesnt wreak of being a code head, I don't know what does

@fullstackclown oh sweet Jesus! I understand trying to automate but this is a bit much.

Conventional commits are actually useful and make the history less messy
Also for automatic changelog creation or bumping the version
But rejecting a PR because of this is just dumb when GitHub allows the repo owner to squash+merge PRs and write his own message

I wonder if someone else will conveniently submit the "fix" you made after they reject yours. Like people who game points on SO, there are people who game github.

I am an fan of it....

Large projects get much easier when you have a clear way of commit messages.

I'm not saying conventional commit messages, but enforcing a specific way of commit messages is always a wise idea.

When you have to deal with multiple persons and many commits per day, this makes the difference between chaos and order.

Bisecting? Easy peasy.
Versioning? Yeah, there's a BC in the commit header, major version inc.
Changelogs and billings? Just extract from the git rev-log, send it via rest to the ticket system, get hours, double check and book it.

A (D)VCS can make a lot of painful tasks easy if just everyone sticks to a common schema of messages, as one can then rely on the metadata present in the messages.

*shrugs* don't cry for sth trivial like a rebase / reword / push.

After all, someone other than you has the burden of maintainership / bug triage / release process etc.

I'm much more of a fan of how definitely typed does it. They have a bot that triages and tags pull requests _based on the actual content of what was changed_. It's really quite amazing.

But I'm not going to school again to learn about some convoluted way to write a to-the-character accurate commit title & description

not a fan, already has >= 4 different formats of commit messages which looks like no-one agreed on what to choose

@devRancid format doesn't really matter in a commit message, it just needs to have the information to find out why and what was done

@fullstackclown
They seem to be relaxed about conventional commits.