github-starred/conventionalcommits.org
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/conventional-commits/conventionalcommits.org.git synced 2026-03-22 12:44:37 -05:00
Code Issues 153 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

allow BREAKING CHANGE: with any verb. #6

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-02-17 11:31:04 -06:00 by GiteaMirror · 4 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-17 11:31:04 -06:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @bcoe on GitHub (Apr 15, 2017).

Originally assigned to: @jameswomack on GitHub.

I think we should amend the specification to allow BREAKING CHANGE: with any commit type (right now we indicate that a BREAKING CHANGE should be a fix, or feat).

I'm finding as I drop Node 0.10/0.12 support on some libraries, I have chore commits that are breaking.

Originally created by @bcoe on GitHub (Apr 15, 2017). Originally assigned to: @jameswomack on GitHub. I think we should amend the specification to allow `BREAKING CHANGE:` with any commit type (right now we indicate that a BREAKING CHANGE should be a fix, or feat). I'm finding as I drop Node 0.10/0.12 support on some libraries, I have `chore` commits that are breaking.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-17 11:31:06 -06:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@stevemao commented on GitHub (Apr 16, 2017):

Yes, see https://github.com/angular/angular/issues/5672
BTW, dropping Node 0.10/0.12 support should probably be a ci

@stevemao commented on GitHub (Apr 16, 2017): Yes, see https://github.com/angular/angular/issues/5672 BTW, dropping Node 0.10/0.12 support should probably be a [`ci`](https://github.com/angular/angular/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#type)
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-17 11:31:07 -06:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jameswomack commented on GitHub (Apr 17, 2017):

@bcoe I agree with this. I think one should try for BREAKING CHANGEs to be a fix or feat, but we need to accept that even dependency changes can be flagged as breaking when one takes stability & semver seriously.

@jameswomack commented on GitHub (Apr 17, 2017): @bcoe I agree with this. I think one should try for `BREAKING CHANGE`s to be a `fix` or `feat`, but we need to accept that even dependency changes can be flagged as breaking when one takes stability & semver seriously.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-17 11:31:08 -06:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Tapppi commented on GitHub (May 3, 2017):

@bcoe Agreed, we have lots of precedent both in our own projects and in the community. standard-version has a BREAKING chore too (node 0.10/0.12).

@Tapppi commented on GitHub (May 3, 2017): @bcoe Agreed, we have lots of precedent both in our own projects and in the community. `standard-version` has a BREAKING chore too (node 0.10/0.12).
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-17 11:31:09 -06:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jameswomack commented on GitHub (May 5, 2017):

I'm closing based on #11 — feel free to re-open as needed.

@jameswomack commented on GitHub (May 5, 2017): I'm closing based on #11 — feel free to re-open as needed.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
bug
discussion
enhancement
greenkeeper
help wanted
meeting-agenda
operations
process
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 question
suggestion
support
triaged
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
GiteaMirror ninjasurge
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/conventionalcommits.org#6
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?