-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 55
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.
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
style: check pr title with commitlint #853
Conversation
d33b00b
to
36ed850
Compare
36ed850
to
c97df67
Compare
c97df67
to
d3ec505
Compare
.github/workflows/lint.yaml
Outdated
- uses: amannn/action-semantic-pull-request@v5 | ||
env: | ||
GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we just do this ourselves? So that we can make sure its the check that runs against the commits? Similar to how its done in AA-SDK.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
you mean check-in a binary/tool to run the semantic lint check?
I find this one on action marketplace and thinking 3 benefits of using it:
- the github action get updates if in the future semantic pull request extended.
- the binary checks commits semantic is not related to our main logic. we use cocogitto/cocogitto-action@v3 to check it.
- this repo is open sourced, granting read access of github action is low risk.
I have no objections to use our own tool to check semantic commit/pr title and merge 2 checks in one to keep the check consistent.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Got it. My concern here would be if action-semantic-pull-request
and cocogitto-action
diverge in their enforcement of conventional commits then we could get commits in that are invalid to cocogitto-action
and thus cause downstream PRs to fail CI.
If we don't think thats a problem at the moment, we can just address it if it becomes one.
d3ec505
to
4d1ce42
Compare
Should we sync our config with the one from the action github? https://github.com/amannn/action-semantic-pull-request?tab=readme-ov-file#installation |
the example is based on multi-forks repo. we use multi-branch so the trigger and read permission are slightly different. |
4d1ce42
to
e25b5bf
Compare
[Closes/Fixes] #
Proposed Changes
test pr title check.