[TYPO3-team-core-v5] Changelog considerations

[Robert Lemke]

Hi Bastian,

On 06.07.2009, at 16:35, Bastian Waidelich wrote:

> The difference between [~API] and [~TASK] is, that in the second case
> I'm changing something that is not code related or is not part of the
> public API (marked @internal). Correct?

Could be code related but usually is something not worth mentioning in
the release notes. API changes always must be tagged with [~API].

> What if I'm committing a feature that adds a method to the API?
> "[+API][+FEATURE] FLOW3 (Core): Method initializeDrupal() has been  
> added
> to the Bootsrap"
> Or would I still have to write two lines?

no, I think the above is fine.

> When changing something that is not related to a sub package (e.g.
> global configuration) I'd leave out the  "(SubPackage)"-part, right?

Yes.

I tended to use FLOW3 (Core) for something FLOW3 distribution related  
but
that might be misleading.#

> Should we make the -~+ prefixes mandatory? After all every commit  
> adds,
> removes or changes something ;)

Well, I guess [TASK] doesn't need it at least.

> "FIX" could be "BUGFIX", no? According to dict.cc "fix" means  
> something
> like "pointer" or "clue" rather than error-correcting.

Okay. Additionally we could agree on:

[+BUGFIX] This commit really resolves the bug and closes the ticket
[~BUGFIX] Changed / added some code related to a bug fix, maybe even  
after it has been closed.
[-BUGFIX] Reverted the bugfix - need to re-open the ticket

>>> And we might even enforce them by a simple pre-commit hook.
>>> What do you think?
>>
>> Well, why not - can you do that?
>
> I've written a little script that checks each line of the commit  
> message
> against the following regular expression:
> ^(?P<BreakingChange>\[!!!\])?\[(?P<Prefix>[\+\-\~])?(?P<Type>FEATURE| 
> FIX|API|CONFIGURATION|TASK)\]\s(?P<Package>[A-Z][A-Za-z0-9]+)(\s\((? 
> P<SubPackage>[A-Z][A-Za-z0-9]+)\))?:\s(?P<Message>.*)$
>
> and intercepts the commit if one or more lines are incorrect.
>
> I'll talk to one of the admins about how to activate this as pre- 
> commit
> only for specified folders of the repository.
>
> Maybe we should allow an additional type [NOTE] to be able to  
> circumvent
> the check then.

Maybe not [NOTE] but something like [ADMINISTRATIVE] for special cases.

>> Yes, I'd be very happy if you or someone else could write a little  
>> php
>> script doing that conversion. Just a standalone script - I'll  
>> integrate
>> that later into a whole-in-one release app.
>
> I'll write a little package if you don't mind - I need some  
> practice ;)
> You'll have it before the next release!

ok!

robert