Commits and Pull Request title convention

[eitsupi]

@jcbhmr For monorepo, my preference is to employ squash merge and conventional commit title to clarify which commit belongs to which component and reduce the number of commits. e.g. feat(featurename): add a new option to ...

What are your thoughts on repository settings?

[jcbhmr]

I'm open to any conventions! ♥️ If you want to take the initiative, go ahead. I'm more of a "refine your technique as you grow" (meaning I tend to only do conventions like that when I need to) kinda person, but I'll defer to you since you seem to know what you're talking about.

In other words, go for any settings or convention you want 🚀 (just try to document them somewhere lmao 🧐)

[eitsupi]

Thanks for your opinion.

Perhaps it would be worth considering a voting system or something similar when the organization has more members.

[jcbhmr]

Perhaps it would be worth considering a voting system or something similar when the organization has more members.

Good idea! 👍 Put it on the docket 😆

[eitsupi]

For now, I protected the main branch of https://github.com/devcontainers-community/templates and set only allow squash merging.

If we wanted to restrict the PR title, we could use the following action.
https://github.com/amannn/action-semantic-pull-request