I hate Conventional Commits. It actively makes me want to avoid committing regularly so I don’t have to think of a commit “type” that fits within the philosophy.

I suppose that will change if I use it more… but regardless, the below breakdown from a ChatGPT message helped a lot. I don’t understand why the Conventional Commits website is so vague on details on what it’s types mean, because it’s not immediately obvious (some like style and chore can feel to me at least, like they could both be used, and that just introduces ambiguity which just adds to the above frustrations).

• feat: The commit introduces a new feature to the codebase or application.
• fix: The commit addresses a bug or issue in the codebase, resolving it.
• docs: The commit involves documentation changes, such as updating README files or adding inline comments.
• style: The commit makes cosmetic changes to the codebase, like formatting, whitespace, or code style improvements. These changes do not affect the code’s functionality.
• refactor: The commit involves code refactoring, i.e., restructuring or optimizing existing code without adding new features or fixing bugs.
• test: The commit adds or modifies tests or test-related code, ensuring the codebase’s integrity and quality.
• chore: The commit includes changes to build processes, development tools, or other miscellaneous tasks not directly related to code functionality.
• perf: The commit improves the performance of the codebase or optimizes certain operations.