Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@qoomon
Last active December 6, 2025 12:31
Show Gist options
  • Select an option

  • Save qoomon/5dfcdf8eec66a051ecd85625518cfd13 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.

Select an option

Save qoomon/5dfcdf8eec66a051ecd85625518cfd13 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Conventional Commits Cheatsheet

Conventional Commit Messages starline

See how a minor change to your commit message style can make a difference.

git commit -m"<type>(<optional scope>): <description>" \
  -m"<optional body>" \
  -m"<optional footer>"

Note

This cheatsheet is opinionated, however it does not violate the specification of conventional commits

Tip

Take a look at git-conventional-commits ; a CLI util to ensure these conventions, determine version and generate changelogs.

Commit Message Formats

General Commit

<type>(<optional scope>): <description>
empty line as separator
<optional body>
empty line as separator
<optional footer>

Initial Commit

chore: init

Merge Commit

Merge branch '<branch name>'

Follows default git merge message

Revert Commit

Revert "<reverted commit subject line>"

Follows default git revert message

Types

  • Changes relevant to the API or UI:
    • feat Commits that add, adjust or remove a new feature to the API or UI
    • fix Commits that fix an API or UI bug of a preceded feat commit
  • refactor Commits that rewrite or restructure code without altering API or UI behavior
    • perf Commits are special type of refactor commits that specifically improve performance
  • style Commits that address code style (e.g., white-space, formatting, missing semi-colons) and do not affect application behavior
  • test Commits that add missing tests or correct existing ones
  • docs Commits that exclusively affect documentation
  • build Commits that affect build-related components such as build tools, dependencies, project version, CI/CD pipelines, ...
  • ops Commits that affect operational components like infrastructure, deployment, backup, recovery procedures, ...
  • chore Commits that represent tasks like initial commit, modifying .gitignore, ...

Scopes

The scope provides additional contextual information.

  • The scope is an optional part
  • Allowed scopes vary and are typically defined by the specific project
  • Do not use issue identifiers as scopes

Breaking Changes Indicator

  • A commit that introduce breaking changes must be indicated by an ! before the : in the subject line e.g. feat(api)!: remove status endpoint
  • Breaking changes should be described in the commit footer section, if the commit description isn't sufficiently informative

Description

The description contains a concise description of the change.

  • The description is a mandatory part
  • Use the imperative, present tense: "change" not "changed" nor "changes"
    • Think of This commit will... or This commit should...
  • Do not capitalize the first letter
  • Do not end the description with a period (.)
  • I case of breaking changes also see breaking changes indicator

Body

The body should include the motivation for the change and contrast this with previous behavior.

  • The body is an optional part
  • Use the imperative, present tense: "change" not "changed" nor "changes"

Footer

The footer should contain issue references and informations about Breaking Changes

  • The footer is an optional part, except if the commit introduce breaking changes
  • Optionally reference issue identifiers (e.g., Closes #123, Fixes JIRA-456)
  • Breaking Changes must start with the word BREAKING CHANGE:
    • For a single line description just add a space after BREAKING CHANGE:
    • For a multi line description add two new lines after BREAKING CHANGE:

Versioning

  • If your next release contains commit with...
    • Breaking Changes incremented the major version
    • API relevant changes (feat or fix) incremented the minor version
  • Else increment the patch version

Examples

  • feat: add email notifications on new direct messages
    
  • feat(shopping cart): add the amazing button
    
  • feat!: remove ticket list endpoint
    
    refers to JIRA-1337
    
    BREAKING CHANGE: ticket endpoints no longer supports list all entities.
    
  • fix(shopping-cart): prevent order an empty shopping cart
    
  • fix(api): fix wrong calculation of request body checksum
    
  • fix: add missing parameter to service call
    
    The error occurred due to <reasons>.
    
  • perf: decrease memory footprint for determine unique visitors by using HyperLogLog
    
  • build: update dependencies
    
  • build(release): bump version to 1.0.0
    
  • refactor: implement fibonacci number calculation as recursion
    
  • style: remove empty line
    

Git Hook Scripts to ensure commit message header format

Click to expand

commit-msg Hook (local)

pre-receive Hook (server side)

  • create following file in your repository folder .git/hooks/pre-receive
    #!/usr/bin/env bash
    
    # Pre-receive hook that will block commits with messages that do not follow regex rule
    
    commit_msg_type_regex='feat|fix|refactor|style|test|docs|build'
    commit_msg_scope_regex='.{1,20}'
    commit_msg_description_regex='.{1,100}'
    commit_msg_regex="^(${commit_msg_type_regex})(\(${commit_msg_scope_regex}\))?: (${commit_msg_description_regex})\$"
    merge_msg_regex="^Merge branch '.+'\$"
    
    zero_commit="0000000000000000000000000000000000000000"
    
    # Do not traverse over commits that are already in the repository
    excludeExisting="--not --all"
    
    error=""
    while read oldrev newrev refname; do
      # branch or tag get deleted
      if [ "$newrev" = "$zero_commit" ]; then
        continue
      fi
    
      # Check for new branch or tag
      if [ "$oldrev" = "$zero_commit" ]; then
        rev_span=`git rev-list $newrev $excludeExisting`
      else
        rev_span=`git rev-list $oldrev..$newrev $excludeExisting`
      fi
    
      for commit in $rev_span; do
        commit_msg_header=$(git show -s --format=%s $commit)
        if ! [[ "$commit_msg_header" =~ (${commit_msg_regex})|(${merge_msg_regex}) ]]; then
          echo "$commit" >&2
          echo "ERROR: Invalid commit message format" >&2
          echo "$commit_msg_header" >&2
          error="true"
        fi
      done
    done
    
    if [ -n "$error" ]; then
      exit 1
    fi
  • ⚠ make .git/hooks/pre-receive executable (unix: chmod +x '.git/hooks/pre-receive')

References


@RobSmyth
Copy link

RobSmyth commented Dec 3, 2025

Hi @pycaw,

You said:

many other repos I think don't either if you consider how they categorize changes by the new-changed-fixed methodology

Yea there are many many ways peeple like to stucture their commit messages. Not so many teams use the convention commit (CC) standard. Some versioning tool authors say their tool is a "opinionated" variation of the CC standard (and tell you how they vary from CC) and that is fine. If your doing a variation of CC, that is fine, but say so to avoid confusion and allow people to understand version numbers.

My comments here are about CC as this discussion's title is Conventional Commits Cheatsheet.

In a CC context, anything that changes the product's public behaviour is either a fix or a feature. Ask the question: Does an end user use it or needs to know about the change?

behavior seems vague in a CC context. I had thought you were talking about team behaviour, sorry.

To use the commit message examples you gave:

  • behavior(execute): disable logs with ... -- --help

If command line you describe is used by users then it is part of the product's public behaviour and the change is either a bug fix or a feature. If the command is line is not used or exposed (e.g: documented) to any users then it is not a feature or fix.

  • behavior!: (CLI) config files now have .yaml extension instead of .yml

If users use this config file then it is a breaking change (hence the "!"). If somebody complained that it ought to have been .yaml (maybe they asked for .yaml inthe first place) then this is a fix.

Note: About the use of the ! symbol here. CC says: "BREAKING CHANGE: a commit that has a footer BREAKING CHANGE:, or appends a ! after the type/scope, introduces a breaking API change (correlating with MAJOR in Semantic Versioning). A BREAKING CHANGE can be part of commits of any type.". So this behavior! flags to users a breaking change and the major version number will bump.

  • behavior!: no more -D/--auto-dir-name

Not sure about behavior as I do not have a definition and I do not know why the change is being made. Looks fine to me. Sounds like a feature has been dropped and users need to be notified of the breaking change.

  • behavior: slightly reworked config upgrade mechanics

I do not know what "mechanics" is so I cannot comment on this one.

  • behavior(rip): not compressing logs anymore

The question is why and if users need to know. If users were decompressing log files and this makes life easier then it is a feature "hey users you no longer need to decompress logs". If it was doen to improve performance then question is if anybody complained about the performance. A fix if the was a real problem or a new feature (better performance) if the user may notice.

@pycaw
Copy link

pycaw commented Dec 3, 2025

@RobSmyth

Hi @pycaw,

You said:

many other repos I think don't either if you consider how they categorize changes by the new-changed-fixed methodology

Yea there are many many ways peeple like to stucture their commit messages. Not so many teams use the convention commit (CC) standard. Some versioning tool authors say their tool is a "opinionated" variation of the CC standard (and tell you how they vary from CC) and that is fine. If your doing a variation of CC, that is fine, but say so to avoid confusion and allow people to understand version numbers.

My comments here are about CC as this discussion's title is Conventional Commits Cheatsheet.

In a CC context, anything that changes the product's public behaviour is either a fix or a feature. Ask the question: Does an end user use it or needs to know about the change?

behavior seems vague in a CC context. I had thought you were talking about team behaviour, sorry.

To use the commit message examples you gave:

* behavior(execute): disable logs with ... -- --help

If command line you describe is used by users then it is part of the product's public behaviour and the change is either a bug fix or a feature. If the command is line is not used or exposed (e.g: documented) to any users then it is not a feature or fix.

* behavior!: (CLI) config files now have .yaml extension instead of .yml

If users use this config file then it is a breaking change (hence the "!"). If somebody complained that it ought to have been .yaml (maybe they asked for .yaml inthe first place) then this is a fix.

Note: About the use of the ! symbol here. CC says: "BREAKING CHANGE: a commit that has a footer BREAKING CHANGE:, or appends a ! after the type/scope, introduces a breaking API change (correlating with MAJOR in Semantic Versioning). A BREAKING CHANGE can be part of commits of any type.". So this behavior! flags to users a breaking change and the major version number will bump.

* behavior!: no more -D/--auto-dir-name

Not sure about behavior as I do not have a definition and I do not know why the change is being made. Looks fine to me. Sounds like a feature has been dropped and users need to be notified of the breaking change.

* behavior: slightly reworked config upgrade mechanics

I do not know what "mechanics" is so I cannot comment on this one.

* behavior(rip): not compressing logs anymore

The question is why and if users need to know. If users were decompressing log files and this makes life easier then it is a feature "hey users you no longer need to decompress logs". If it was doen to improve performance then question is if anybody complained about the performance. A fix if the was a real problem or a new feature (better performance) if the user may notice.

It looks like to me your answer partly validated this technique, and partly brought in ambiguous criteria.

For example, the .yml vs .yaml change, maybe it was the janitor in the office dungeons that whispered to the dev that .yaml is the way to go. Let's assume this API has not been broadly exposed yet so making the change is relatively okay (still !). Why would one need to grind themselves over to coerce it into a feature or a fix when it is neither?

Regarding the log compression one, maybe for 1/3 of the users it is a feature because they don't have to decompress it themselves, for 1/3 it is a an "anti-feature" because they preferred as it was, and for 1/3 it is an unimportant behavioral change. Basing the change's categorization on why the modification was made isn't generally feasible with many projects, but even you can do so, miscommunication can occur due to feat/fix coercion which is uncalled for in the first place in my opinion.

@JohnnyWalkerDigital
Copy link

behavior(execute): disable logs with ... -- --help

I see what you mean, you're changing how the system operates, hence "behaviour". However I wonder if it would fit in chore?

behavior!: (CLI) config files now have .yaml extension instead of .yml

Remember that commit messages are supposed to be written in the imperative, present tense (which is the git standard). So this should be: "rename all .yml file extensions to .yaml". Again it seems like a chore?

behavior: slightly reworked config upgrade mechanics

This seems like the definition of a refactor, no?

behavior(rip): not compressing logs anymore

Disabling compression would be a feature change, IMO. It directly affects the users of the system: you're now serving the logs in an uncompressed format.

Just my perspective.

@pycaw
Copy link

pycaw commented Dec 3, 2025

behavior(execute): disable logs with ... -- --help

I see what you mean, you're changing how the system operates, hence "behaviour". However I wonder if it would fit in chore?

Users are interested in logs. If they had appeared when they shouldn't, and now they don't, they should also be notified. This one is borders the fix tag btw.

behavior!: (CLI) config files now have .yaml extension instead of .yml

Remember that commit messages are supposed to be written in the imperative, present tense (which is the git standard). So this should be: "rename all .yml file extensions to .yaml". Again it seems like a chore?

Users themselves manage such config files, it is a primary feature. You are right I suppose about imperative present tense , I have been unable to get myself to adopt it for a long time for reasons beyond me.

behavior: slightly reworked config upgrade mechanics

This seems like the definition of a refactor, no?

My usage of behavior sort of begins where refactor ends. These changes were very much visible from the outside as users deal with configs themselves. But, with the behavior tag under my tool belt, I go beyond and apply the behavior tag for changes that are well below what's visible from outside. This allows me to have a smaller scope for refactor so that they are applied to changes where not even the internal API of the particular module had changed. "refactor" is overused imo.

behavior(rip): not compressing logs anymore

Disabling compression would be a feature change, IMO. It directly affects the users of the system: you're now serving the logs in an uncompressed format.

I said what I said regarding this, could have been an "anti-feature" flag just as well as "feature". I'd rather not call such changes features. It comes across as misdirected, insincere, and reminds me of the tendency in management realm -- nowadays especially -- to prioritize sales over substance.

@RobSmyth
Copy link

RobSmyth commented Dec 3, 2025

Hi @JohnnyWalkerDigital,

behavior(execute): disable logs with ... -- --help

I see what you mean, you're changing how the system operates, hence "behaviour". However I wonder if it would fit in chore?

Do you think this change needs to be user documentation, release notes, or bump the version? I wonder if your using Semmantic Versioning as that would impact process here.

@dexoryn
Copy link

dexoryn commented Dec 4, 2025

Thanks, when the project structure completely changed and the version completely upgraded, what prefix we can use?

@raed-bash
Copy link

raed-bash commented Dec 4, 2025

what if we fix typing errors? what should we put before a commit message?

put refactor

@JohnnyWalkerDigital
Copy link

JohnnyWalkerDigital commented Dec 4, 2025

Attempt at a flow chart:

Did you fix a bug?

Yes: It's fix:

No: Did you change functionality or affect UI?

Yes: It's feat:

No: Did you add or change tests?

Yes: It's test:

No: Did you change code style or formatting?

Yes: It's style:

No: Did you make changes to documentation?

Yes: It's docs:

No: Did you change things related to build or deploy operations?

Yes: It's build:

No: Did you change something related to devops, infrastructure or backups?

Yes: It's ops:

No: Did you complete a maintenance task or other non-code task for the project (eg. modifying .gitignore or making initial commit)?

Yes: It's chore:

No: Did you rewrite or restructure code specifically for performance?

Yes: It's perf:

No: It's refactor:

@ttytm
Copy link

ttytm commented Dec 5, 2025

@JohnnyWalkerDigital

Attempt at a flow chart:

[...]

Did you fix a bug?

Yes: It's fix:

No: Did you change functionality or affect UI?

Yes: It's feat:

No: Did you add or change tests?

Yes: It's test:

No: Did you change code style or formatting?

Yes: It's style:

No: Did you make changes to documentation?

Yes: It's docs:

No: Did you change things related to build or deploy operations?

Yes: It's build:

No: Did you change something related to devops, infrastructure or backups?

Yes: It's ops:

No: Did you complete a maintenance task or other non-code task for the project (eg. modifying .gitignore or making initial commit)?

Yes: It's chore:

No: Did you rewrite or restructure code specifically for performance?

Yes: It's perf:

No: It's refactor:

I think using a flowchart makes the solution more complicated.
AFAIK GitHub renders mermaid diagrams, so it should become visible here:

flowchart TD
    A[Did you fix a bug?]
    A -- Yes --> B[It's fix]
    A -- No --> C[Did you change functionality or affect UI?]

    C -- Yes --> D[It's feat]
    C -- No --> E[Did you add or change tests?]

    E -- Yes --> F[It's test]
    E -- No --> G[Did you change code style or formatting?]

    G -- Yes --> H[It's style]
    G -- No --> I[Did you make changes to documentation?]

    I -- Yes --> J[It's docs]
    I -- No --> K[Did you change things related to build or deploy operations?]

    K -- Yes --> L[It's build]
    K -- No --> M[Did you change something related to devops, infrastructure or backups?]

    M -- Yes --> N[It's ops]
    M -- No --> O[Did you complete a maintenance task or other non-code task?]

    O -- Yes --> P[It's chore]
    O -- No --> Q[Did you rewrite or restructure code specifically for performance?]

    Q -- Yes --> R[It's perf]
    Q -- No --> S[It's refactor]
Loading

Since every decision is a simple yes/no that ends in exactly one category, a decision table (or ordered checklist) is likely a better fit.

Checklist attempt based on the order of the original answer

  1. If it fixes a bug → fix
  2. Else if it changes functionality or UI → feat
  3. Else if it adds or changes tests → test
  4. Else if it changes code style or formatting → style
  5. Else if it changes documentation → docs
  6. Else if it affects build or deploy → build
  7. Else if it affects devops, infrastructure, or backups → ops
  8. Else if it’s a maintenance or non-code task → chore
  9. Else if it improves performance → perf
  10. Else → refactor

Table attempt based on the order of the original answer

Question If Yes → Use Type
Fixes a bug? fix
Changes functionality or UI? feat
Adds or changes tests? test
Code style or formatting only? style
Documentation only? docs
Build or deploy related? build
DevOps / infra / backups? ops
Maintenance or non-code? chore
Performance-focused change? perf
Otherwise refactor

Table attempt with structural improvement

While the order in your answer is already a strong foundation. I think the priority order can be improved. Attempt below trying to match the current conventional Commit semantics:

Question If Yes → Type
Bug fix? fix
New or changed feature in API/UI? feat
Performance improvement? perf
Code restructuring without behavior change? refactor
Formatting only? style
Tests added/corrected? test
Documentation only? docs
Build tools, dependencies, versions? build
DevOps, infrastructure, or backups? ops
Anything else chore

Overall the intent here is minimizing mental load, improve long-term consistency, use chore as true fallback to preventing it's lazy overuse.

@AchiraNadeeshan
Copy link

correct typo "I case" to "In case" in commit message description rules.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment