Benjamin E. Coe

@Mouvedia I think from conventionalcommits.org's point of view, it only cares about the prefix `revert: `, the tooling author would be able to decide the meaning of everything after the...

@Artoria2e5 bother you to update your PR to reflect the `1.0.0` version of the specification we just landed?

@jasonkuhrt @JeanMertz is this a feature that we could potentially support with the existing footer, e.g., `Initial-Stable-Release: brief description of what this means for folks`, I'm concerned about adding features...

@jasonkuhrt sorry for the slow response, haven't had the time I'd like to dedicate to this project. I'm still on the fence about adding more complexity to the spec ......

@Artoria2e5 I do not have the background to know how to address this topic. I would like us to opt for whatever ~country code~ language code is most respectful to...

@Artoria2e5 given you already have a PR open improving translations, perhaps we could also move into a language code with a suffix, away from `zh`?

I was picturing that this would work, but the `BREAKING CHANGE` would actually be parsed out of the body rather than from the footers.

As a potential date, I'd like to suggest, **Friday, October 9th, 10AM - 11AM PDT**.

👋 sorry for the very slow turn around, up for rebasing @Zearin? I think probably we should make these changes in `next` and then call this a patch release of...

@JeanMertz @tunnckoCore we've been working to formalize the Conventional Commit grammar: https://github.com/conventional-commits/parser#the-grammar Perhaps we could move this conversation there? my hope is that we can formally define the grammar, with...