Skip to content
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

Document tag_format and centrally set default value #775

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 15, 2023

Conversation

robertschweizer
Copy link
Contributor

@robertschweizer robertschweizer commented Jun 27, 2023

Description

Split out from #692.

Please review the commits separately.

Checklist

  • Add test cases to all the changes you introduce
  • Run ./scripts/format and ./scripts/test locally to ensure this change passes linter check and test
  • Test the changes on the local machine manually
  • Update the documentation for the changes

Expected behavior

Steps to Test This Pull Request

Additional context

I was very confused about these different usages. Documenting them
might be a good basis for future simplification.
This should be non-breaking unless users rely on the looser version
validation of TAG_FORMAT_REGEXS compared to their `version_scheme`.
We've been using this default already in `normalize_tag`,
but setting this value in the settings dict is cleaner.
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 27, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 98.36% and project coverage change: +0.10 🎉

Comparison is base (eb39f8b) 97.31% compared to head (9248122) 97.41%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #775      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   97.31%   97.41%   +0.10%     
==========================================
  Files          42       42              
  Lines        2045     2090      +45     
==========================================
+ Hits         1990     2036      +46     
+ Misses         55       54       -1     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 97.41% <98.36%> (+0.10%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...en/cz/conventional_commits/conventional_commits.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
commitizen/providers.py 97.52% <90.00%> (+0.22%) ⬆️
commitizen/commands/init.py 87.50% <94.44%> (+0.06%) ⬆️
commitizen/commands/bump.py 97.63% <96.55%> (-0.52%) ⬇️
commitizen/version_schemes.py 98.42% <98.42%> (ø)
commitizen/__version__.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
commitizen/bump.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
commitizen/changelog.py 99.49% <100.00%> (-0.51%) ⬇️
commitizen/changelog_parser.py 96.96% <100.00%> (+0.04%) ⬆️
commitizen/cli.py 94.20% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 14 more

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

Copy link
Member

@Lee-W Lee-W left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank @robertschweizer for your contribution! I just read it through, and everything looks good to me!

@woile I'm planning to merge this these days. Let me know if you want to take a deeper look.

@Lee-W Lee-W added pr-status: ready-to-merge almost ready to merge. just keep it for a few days for others to check and removed pr-status: wait-for-review labels Jul 15, 2023
@Lee-W Lee-W merged commit c504419 into commitizen-tools:master Jul 15, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
pr-status: ready-to-merge almost ready to merge. just keep it for a few days for others to check
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants