Lobsters is a community-driven platform for sharing and discussing links to articles, tutorials, and projects related to technology and programming. Readers can learn about a wide range of topics, from software development and system administration to cybersecurity and artificial intelligence. With user submissions, comments, and voting, Lobsters provides a platform for collaborative learning and knowledge sharing among technology enthusiasts.

Lobsters

A critical examination of Conventional Commits arguing that enforcing structured commit message formats creates unnecessary barriers for contributors. The author shares a personal experience with Doom Emacs where commit linters blocked valid contributions, highlighting how the convention adds mental overhead without providing meaningful benefits for most projects. The piece contends that information captured in conventional commits is redundant with PR descriptions, and suggests alternative approaches like file-based CI/CD triggers or PR comments are more practical and less restrictive for open source collaboration.

Conventional Commits considered harmful

Seems to me someone is stuck in their ways and isn’t adaptable. The convention isn’t difficult and the assertion that the knowledge of it is not portable is absurd. The next time you encounter it you will have a basis of knowledge to draw from. If you prefer to live under a rock and not encounter anything new that’s fine too…
Perhaps in the process of contributing to a project you can raise your concerns with the maintainers and work to reduce the issues you perceive. It would be far more beneficial for your own causes and to others than creating an article in which the sole purpose seems to be to complain.

If someone finds writing a conventional commit a daunting task, I probably don´t want them near my codebase anyways

My real world experience in a private company project is that most people don’t care to do it properly. Other than that though. They are great for creating automated release notes for example.
Personally i think they add complexity which is not really necessary, but its also not really bad either.
I am torn on this one.

For developers who consistently write clear and descriptive commit messages, Conventional Commits might feel redundant.
However, it establishes a baseline quality for commit messages that everyone on the team can adhere to. The reality, however, is that commit quality often varies across a team. That’s why you’ll see messages like “updated file”.
Conventional Commits is simple to remember and implement, leading to consistently clear commit messages from everyone on the team.

In my personal experience this is something pretty simple and good to have.
Specially when have work with a big team, or on a open source project. It’s exactly like code linting, which no one would complain about because it’s obvious it’s a good thing.
In the end, you just choose your war: having to learn the convention (which is most of the time trivial) or haveing chaos in your git messages. The right choice is obvious.