Tristan Cottam

> If it works for your personal usecase that's great, but doesn't work for: > > * providers: think of a provider giving you free accounts or allowing you to...

This reminds me of the master/slave controversy, which I can empathize with. However, the word "chore" doesn't have the same etymological burden as the French word "corvée" (which, as a...

> [angular/angular@dff6ee3](https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/dff6ee32725197bdb81f3f63c5bd9805f2ed22bb) removed `chore:`. I did notice, a while back actually, and could understand why. Do you reckon it should indeed be abolished altogether? Or is it just massively overused?

> Do you reckon it should indeed be abolished altogether? Or is it just massively overused? Do you have any idea? > `style:` was also removed: [angular/angular@c1bc070](https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/c1bc070b40e0658ffd35f0543fa0255d090bcb02). For this one,...

> In particular, a `style:` is likely to overlap with `refactor:`. Isn't `style` specific to formatting-related changes, which don't affect the code's meaning? > `chore:` can set a bad example....

While [the specification itself](https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/#specification) is reasonable in length, I do like infographics (everyone does — it only encourages adoption), and the types recommended by [@commitlint/config-conventiona](https://github.com/conventional-changelog/commitlint/tree/master/%40commitlint/config-conventional) aren't included in the specification...