See how a minor change to your commit message style can make you a better programmer.
Format: <type>(<scope>): <subject>
<scope>
is optional
feat: add hat wobble
^--^ ^------------^
| |
| +-> Summary in present tense.
|
+-------> Type: chore, docs, feat, fix, refactor, style, or test.
More Examples:
feat
: (new feature for the user, not a new feature for build script)fix
: (bug fix for the user, not a fix to a build script)docs
: (changes to the documentation)style
: (formatting, missing semi colons, etc; no production code change)refactor
: (refactoring production code, eg. renaming a variable)test
: (adding missing tests, refactoring tests; no production code change)chore
: (updating grunt tasks etc; no production code change)
References:
@major-phyo-san I used to use
bump version
andchore: bump version
. But in our current project versioning is updated by CI using git tags so no more specific commits. In your specific example that would make 3 commits:fix: nasty bug
feat: fancy button
chore: bump version
Side note per "Feat" vs "Feature, "Bug" is actually "a small insect" but anyway. Language is contextual, a collection of symbols interpreted within a context. If you leave the context out all words are useless junk.