should we use conventional commits?

[will]

@abrightwell @ngaumont I saw a pr comment go through earlier today talking about the changelog, and it reminded me that I've been seeing a lot of projects out there starting more and more to use "Conventional Commits"

Detailed info is at https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/ (french version), but the short of it is having all commits have a prefix like feat or docs or chore. From there you can auto generate changelogs.

This tool, I've never used but it seems like it could do a decent job https://convco.github.io/ . It's in nixpkgs so it's easy to add to the dev shell.

--git a/flake.nix b/flake.nix
index 84c6656..d306de3 100644
--- a/flake.nix
+++ b/flake.nix
@@ -36,6 +36,7 @@
         };
 
         devShells.default = pkgs.mkShell {
+          packages = with pkgs; [ convco ];
           buildInputs = [ crystal pkgs.libssh2 c2n ];
         };
 

And also I could see having a GitHub action that takes care of doing the changelog whenever something is merged into main.

[ngaumont]

I used conventional commit in my previous company, and we also code our own changelog generator (here but not useable as mercurial based). So, I'm definitely in to use it :)