Chore commit type #112

New Issue

GiteaMirror · 2026-02-17T11:47:15-06:00

GiteaMirror commented

2026-02-17 11:47:15 -06:00

Originally created by @aleksator on GitHub (Oct 10, 2020).

What do you think of not recommending a chore commit type as it was removed from Angular Convention in 2017?

As an alternative, defining a specific meaning for this (and others) commit type would be IMO a great addition to the spec.

Originally created by @aleksator on GitHub (Oct 10, 2020). What do you think of not recommending a `chore` commit type as it was removed from Angular Convention in [2017](https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/dff6ee32725197bdb81f3f63c5bd9805f2ed22bb#diff-6a3371457528722a734f3c51d9238c13)? As an alternative, defining a specific meaning for this (and others) commit type would be IMO a great addition to the spec.

GiteaMirror commented

2026-02-17 11:47:16 -06:00

@ciscoski commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2020):

I fully agree.
The meaning of the tag should be specified or at least a subset of the specification.

@ciscoski commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2020): I fully agree. The meaning of the tag should be specified or at least a subset of the specification.

GiteaMirror commented

2026-02-17 11:47:17 -06:00

@nedbat commented on GitHub (Feb 25, 2021):

FWIW, I've defined it as "a repetitive mechanical task such as updating requirements or translations."

@nedbat commented on GitHub (Feb 25, 2021): FWIW, I've defined it as "a repetitive mechanical task such as updating requirements or translations."

GiteaMirror commented

2026-02-17 11:47:18 -06:00

@tianzhich commented on GitHub (Sep 16, 2021):

Is the chore replaced by ci and build? I saw some articles or comments that said this. But from this commit angular delete the chore type as it was overused, but not prepare to replace it with ci and build.

@tianzhich commented on GitHub (Sep 16, 2021): Is the `chore` replaced by `ci` and `build`? I saw some [articles](https://nitayneeman.com/posts/understanding-semantic-commit-messages-using-git-and-angular/#build) or [comments](https://gist.github.com/brianclements/841ea7bffdb01346392c#gistcomment-3037243) that said this. But from [this commit](https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/dff6ee32725197bdb81f3f63c5bd9805f2ed22bb#diff-6a3371457528722a734f3c51d9238c13) angular delete the `chore` type as it was overused, but not prepare to replace it with `ci` and `build`.

GiteaMirror commented

2026-02-17 11:47:19 -06:00

@daiyam commented on GitHub (Sep 16, 2021):

I feel like chore is kinda too generic. I've replaced it with ci, build, vcs and enhance.

@tianzhich What's your usage?

@daiyam commented on GitHub (Sep 16, 2021): I feel like `chore` is kinda too generic. I've replaced it with `ci`, `build`, `vcs` and `enhance`. @tianzhich What's your usage?

GiteaMirror commented

2026-02-17 11:47:20 -06:00

@tianzhich commented on GitHub (Sep 16, 2021):

I feel like chore is kinda too generic. I've replaced it with ci, build, vcs and enhance.

@tianzhich What's your usage?

Yes - It's too generic so different teams use it in different ways. There are two teams in my company department, one of them use it like ci or build, another use it just like this words meaning some bothering little changes. IMO the conventional-commits team could remove it like Angular team or replaced it with some more specific words like what you did.

@tianzhich commented on GitHub (Sep 16, 2021): > I feel like `chore` is kinda too generic. I've replaced it with `ci`, `build`, `vcs` and `enhance`. > > @tianzhich What's your usage? Yes - It's too generic so different teams use it in different ways. There are two teams in my company department, one of them use it like `ci` or `build`, another use it just like this words meaning *some bothering little changes*. IMO the conventional-commits team could remove it like Angular team or replaced it with some more specific words like what you did.

GiteaMirror commented

2026-02-17 11:47:21 -06:00

@javier-godoy commented on GitHub (Sep 16, 2021):

We had the same discussion in our team (https://github.com/FlowingCode/DevelopmentConventions/issues/11). Since we are already using other types from the Angular convention (build:, ci:, etc) in addition to feat: and fix:, we settled on defining chore: as

Changes, not covered by other types

In practice, that means that chore: is used for changes to .gitignore, license headers, and static resources such as images.

@javier-godoy commented on GitHub (Sep 16, 2021): We had the same discussion in our team (https://github.com/FlowingCode/DevelopmentConventions/issues/11). Since we are already using other types from the Angular convention (`build:`, `ci:`, etc) in addition to `feat:` and `fix:`, we settled on defining `chore:` as > Changes, not covered by other types In practice, that means that `chore:` is used for changes to .gitignore, license headers, and static resources such as images.

GiteaMirror commented

2026-02-17 11:47:22 -06:00

@damianopetrungaro commented on GitHub (Sep 28, 2021):

I see this issue having some 🔔 , what do you think @bcoe ?

Should we drop the support?

Maybe waiting for some more community to ask for this change?

@damianopetrungaro commented on GitHub (Sep 28, 2021): I see this issue having some 🔔 , what do you think @bcoe ? Should we drop the support? Maybe waiting for some more community to ask for this change?

GiteaMirror commented

2026-02-17 11:47:22 -06:00

@javier-godoy commented on GitHub (Sep 28, 2021):

@damianopetrungaro Is there anything to be dropped? In strict sense, conventional-commits just specify that "types other than fix: and feat: are allowed". The mention of chore: is just by means of example.

Then, it's not an issue with Conventional Commits, but with the actual definition of "types other than fix: and feat:" as used by a specific community of practice. The definition adopted by the old Angular Convention ("other changes that don't modify src or test files") was too wide, but other definitions don't pose this problem: for instance, AngularJS defines it as "changes to the build process or auxiliary tools and libraries such as documentation generation" which is mostly equivalent to the build: and ci: types used by other teams.

@javier-godoy commented on GitHub (Sep 28, 2021): @damianopetrungaro Is there anything to be dropped? In strict sense, conventional-commits just specify that "_types other than `fix:` and `feat:` are allowed_". The mention of `chore:` is just by means of example. Then, it's not an issue with Conventional Commits, but with the actual definition of "_types other than `fix:` and `feat:`_" as used by a specific community of practice. The definition adopted by the old Angular Convention ("_other changes that don't modify src or test files"_) was too wide, but other definitions don't pose this problem: for instance, [AngularJS](https://github.com/angular/angular.js/blob/master/DEVELOPERS.md#type) defines it as "_changes to the build process or auxiliary tools and libraries such as documentation generation_" which is mostly equivalent to the `build:` and `ci:` types used by other teams.

GiteaMirror referenced this issue

2026-02-17 11:57:47 -06:00

[PR #112] [MERGED] docs: add Conform to list of tools #293

Sign in to join this conversation.

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/conventionalcommits.org#112