My only beef with it is that they chose "feat" as a way to shorten the word "feature" when "feat" is already a word that means something different. Not every feature is a feat, and a lot of the biggest feats are actually bug fixes.

[–] PastelKeystone@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I’ve seen semantic commits done with emojis which is cute but also annoying, because they’re not as easy to type or grep for.

Semantic commits can be nice, but they can also invite bikeshedding about what’s a “feature” and what’s a “bug fix”, etc.

Not saying they aren’t nice, and if folks are using them and liking them, keep going. But if you haven’t used them before on a team, then just be aware that’s a thing than can happen.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

I'd rather have bikeshedding over terminology that eventually results in a single word than just have free-form commits where you can never tell what the primary motivation between a commit is.