Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Application of RFC 2119 #87

Closed
hutson opened this issue Aug 25, 2018 · 8 comments · Fixed by #133
Closed

Application of RFC 2119 #87

hutson opened this issue Aug 25, 2018 · 8 comments · Fixed by #133
Assignees
@bcoe
Labels
enhancement help wanted suggestion
Milestone
1.1.0

Comments

@hutson
Copy link
Contributor

hutson commented Aug 25, 2018

Re-evaluate how we are applying the terminology defined in RFC 2119 in the Conventional Commits specification.

Came up in #77 (comment)
@hutson
Copy link
Contributor Author

hutson commented Aug 25, 2018

cc @bcoe

@hutson hutson added this to the 1.0.0-beta.3 milestone Aug 25, 2018
@damianopetrungaro
Copy link
Member

@hbetts @bcoe any news on this?

@hutson
Copy link
Contributor Author

hutson commented Oct 16, 2018

I believe this issue is simply waiting on someone to have sufficient time to review the specification and ensure each use of MUST, SHOULD, etc., is being used correctly for the desired result.

@damianopetrungaro
Copy link
Member

Who wants to do it?
So I can assign it 😄

@damianopetrungaro
Copy link
Member

damianopetrungaro commented Feb 8, 2019 •
edited
Loading

@hutson @zeke @raamdev @bcoe @stevemao who wants to pick this one?
I think it is pretty important for us.

@hutson
Copy link
Contributor Author

hutson commented Feb 10, 2019

I would love to, but I just can't commit to doing the work at this time 😢

@bcoe
Copy link
Contributor

bcoe commented Feb 18, 2019

@hutson @damianopetrungaro I'll make an effort to take this on. I essentially just need to re-read RFC 2119, go back through our spec, and correct the usage of our terminology I believe? i.e., we care about the "Specification" section and "Summary" section only?

@bcoe bcoe self-assigned this Feb 18, 2019
@damianopetrungaro
Copy link
Member

Yup @bcoe that's it :)

@bcoe bcoe mentioned this issue Mar 16, 2019
Merged
@bcoe bcoe closed this as completed in #133 Mar 23, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@bcoe bcoe

Labels
enhancement help wanted suggestion
Projects
None yet
Milestone
1.1.0
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

docs: attempt to get us back in alignment with RFC-2119 conventional-commits/conventionalcommits.org
3 participants
@bcoe @hutson @damianopetrungaro