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

I think there are some bad examples in the portuguese version #457

Closed
yudi-azvd opened this issue Jul 1, 2022 · 7 comments
Closed

I think there are some bad examples in the portuguese version #457

yudi-azvd opened this issue Jul 1, 2022 · 7 comments

Comments

@yudi-azvd
Copy link
Contributor

yudi-azvd commented Jul 1, 2022 •
edited
Loading

In the portuguese version of conventional commits, I think there are some bad examples like the following (link):

## Mensagem de commit com ! para chamar a atenção para quebra a compatibilidade

refactor!: remove suporte para Node 6

Which translates to

## Commit message with ! to draw attention to breaking change

refactor!: removes support for Node 6

Maybe this example is not adequate since refactoring means changing the internal structure without modifying observable behavior (Refactoring, Kent Beck). Refactor and breaking changes shouldn't be in the same commit/PR, right?

I'm no expert in software development or refactoring, I'm still learning things. So I'm if I understood something, please tell me :D
@yudi-azvd
Copy link
Contributor Author

yudi-azvd commented Jul 1, 2022 •
edited
Loading

I've just read the summary and it says "a BREAKING CHANGE can be part of commits of any type".

Is this correct even for refactor: type? Can someone explain why?

Also, the reasoning presented in my previous comment was accepted in this PR.

@javier-godoy
Copy link

See #229

@yudi-azvd
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ok... i've read it. Should I open a PR correcting it?

@damianopetrungaro
Copy link
Member

Sure @yudi-azvd ! Feel free to open a PR suggesting a better example! Thanks for noticing it as well :D

@yudi-azvd
Copy link
Contributor Author

yudi-azvd commented Jul 5, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Ok :D One more thing. When correcting, should I modify v1.0.0/index.pt-br.md or create a new doc in, say, v1.0.1/...?

yudi-azvd added a commit to yudi-azvd/conventionalcommits.org that referenced this issue Jul 5, 2022
@yudi-azvd
fix(pt-br): replace bad example for breaking changes in pt-BR version
1bf0713 
There were some examples including <refactor> type in a breaking
change commit. They were replaced by examples from the english
version.

Refs: conventional-commits#457.
@yudi-azvd yudi-azvd mentioned this issue Jul 5, 2022
Merged
@yudi-azvd
Copy link
Contributor Author

yudi-azvd commented Jul 6, 2022 •
edited
Loading

@damianopetrungaro I don't know if you speak portuguese, but can you take a look at #458? Or maybe assign a reviewer who speaks portuguese

damianopetrungaro pushed a commit that referenced this issue Sep 7, 2022
@yudi-azvd
fix(pt-br): replace bad example for breaking changes in pt-BR version
c4242b5 
There were some examples including <refactor> type in a breaking
change commit. They were replaced by examples from the english
version.

Refs: #457.
@yudi-azvd
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closed by #458.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@damianopetrungaro @javier-godoy @yudi-azvd