chore: rm cliff config and update pr template #5929
Conversation
WalkthroughThe change involves updating guidelines for commit messages in the Changes
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
damiannolan
requested review from
colin-axner,
AdityaSripal,
crodriguezvega,
charleenfei,
chatton and
DimitrisJim
as code owners
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 2
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files ignored due to path filters (1)
cliff.tomlis excluded by:!**/*.toml
Files selected for processing (2)
- .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md (2 hunks)
- Makefile (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- Makefile
Additional comments: 4
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md (4)
- 15-17: The addition of a reference to the guidelines for commit messages is a positive change, ensuring contributors are aware of the expected format. This aligns with best practices for maintaining a clean and understandable commit history.
- 38-46: > 📝 NOTE
This review was outside the diff hunks and was mapped to the diff hunk with the greatest overlap. Original lines [17-43]
The examples of conventional commit messages provided are helpful for guiding contributors on how to structure their commit messages. This section effectively communicates the repository's standards and expectations for commit messages, which is crucial for automated tools and readability.
- 43-44: The instruction to provide a conventional commit message and the note about the discretion of including a changelog entry are clear and concise. This flexibility for chores and minor changes is sensible, reducing unnecessary noise in the changelog.
- 42-42: The hint suggests "godoc" might be a spelling mistake, but in this context, it's correctly referring to Go's documentation tool. No change is needed here, but it's good to ensure technical terms are used accurately.
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 1
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (1)
- .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md (2 hunks)
Additional comments: 4
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md (4)
- 15-17: The addition of guidelines for commit messages and the emphasis on using conventional commits is a positive change. It helps standardize commit messages across the repository, making it easier to understand the history and purpose of changes.
- 17-17: Providing example commit messages is helpful for contributors, especially those new to conventional commits. This section clearly demonstrates the expected format and types of changes that should be documented in commit messages.
- 41-41: Updating documentation and adding relevant comments are crucial for maintaining the codebase. It's good to see these items included in the checklist, ensuring that contributions are well-documented and understandable.
- 43-45: The requirement for a conventional commit message and the discretion given for changelog entries are sensible. However, it's important to ensure that significant changes are still documented in a changelog or release notes to keep users informed.
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
Outdated
| @@ -45,8 +38,9 @@ write a little note why. | |||
| - [ ] Linked to Github issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The official spelling of "GitHub" includes a capital "H". It's important to use the correct spelling for clarity and professionalism.
- Github
+ GitHubCommittable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation.
| - [ ] Linked to Github issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work. | |
| - [ ] Linked to GitHub issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 1
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (1)
- .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md (2 hunks)
Additional comments: 3
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md (3)
- 15-17: The addition of guidelines for commit messages, emphasizing the use of conventional commits, is a positive change. It helps standardize commit messages across the repository, making it easier to understand the history and purpose of changes. This aligns well with best practices in software development.
- 43-43: Encouraging contributors to provide a conventional commit message for each PR is a good practice. It ensures consistency and clarity in the project's commit history. This guideline complements the earlier section on commit messages and reinforces the importance of adhering to conventional commits.
- 44-44: The flexibility given to contributors regarding the inclusion of a changelog entry is thoughtful. It acknowledges that not all changes (e.g., chores) need to be documented in the changelog, allowing for discretion by PR reviewers. This can streamline the PR process for minor changes while ensuring significant updates are properly documented.
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (1)
- .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md (2 hunks)
Additional comments: 6
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md (6)
- 15-17: The addition of guidelines for commit messages, referencing the repository's preference for conventional commits, is a positive change. It helps contributors understand the expected format and standards for commit messages, which can improve the quality and readability of the commit history.
- 38-38: It's good practice to link to GitHub issues or design documents in PRs as it provides context and facilitates discussion. This checklist item reinforces the importance of transparency and collaboration in the development process.
- 41-41: Encouraging contributors to write unit and integration tests is crucial for maintaining the quality and stability of the codebase. This checklist item ensures that testing is a priority in the contribution process.
- 43-43: Reiterating the need for a conventional commit message in the checklist is a good practice. It ensures that contributors are reminded of this requirement right before submission, which can help maintain consistency in the repository's commit history.
- 44-44: The flexibility provided by allowing the omission of changelog entries for chores is sensible. It acknowledges that not all changes are significant enough to warrant a changelog entry, which can help keep the changelog focused on meaningful updates.
- 45-45: Encouraging contributors to re-review the
Files changedsection before submission is a good practice. It can help catch last-minute errors or omissions, improving the quality of the PR.
Description
Before we can merge this PR, please make sure that all the following items have been
checked off. If any of the checklist items are not applicable, please leave them but
write a little note why.
docs/) or specification (x/<module>/spec/).godoccomments.Files changedin the Github PR explorer.Codecov Reportin the comment section below once CI passes.Summary by CodeRabbit