fix: update regex to support breaking changes #305

shenxianpeng · 2025-10-12T21:28:05Z

closes #301

Summary by CodeRabbit

Chores
- Commit subject validation now recognizes breaking-change notation in conventional commits (e.g., feat!:, fix(scope)!). Expanded prefix handling; behavior for other subjects remains unchanged. No changes to public interfaces or runtime behavior.
Tests
- Added coverage for breaking-change and scoped breaking-change subjects to confirm they are accepted by the validator, improving confidence in commit-check compatibility with common formatting patterns.

coderabbitai · 2025-10-12T21:28:14Z

Walkthrough

Updated the commit subject validator regex in commit_check/engine.py to support conventional-commit breaking-change syntax (e.g., feat!:, fix(scope)!:). Added two unit tests covering breaking-change cases in tests/engine_test.py. No exported/public API changes.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Validator regex update `commit_check/engine.py`	Adjusted first-word extraction regex to allow an optional exclamation mark before the colon in conventional-commit prefixes (supports patterns like `feat!:` and `fix(scope)!:`). No other logic altered.
Test coverage for breaking changes `tests/engine_test.py`	Added tests: `test_validate_with_breaking_change` and `test_validate_with_scoped_breaking_change` to validate acceptance of `feat!:` and `fix(scope)!:` cases.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Suggested labels

developer

Poem

I twitch my nose at commits so bright,
Now “feat!:” hops in, a glorious sight.
Regex burrows deeper, snug and tight—
Tests nibble edges, all checks right.
Thump-thump! The log reads clean tonight. 🐇✨

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 75.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	You can run `@coderabbitai generate docstrings` to improve docstring coverage.

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title Check	✅ Passed	The title succinctly reflects the primary change by indicating that the regex has been updated to support breaking-change syntax, directly matching the core modification in the commit-check engine without extraneous detail.
Linked Issues Check	✅ Passed	The changes directly address issue #301 by extending the SubjectImperativeValidator regex to allow the `!` breaking-change marker and adding tests to verify both unscoped and scoped notations, fully satisfying the linked issue’s requirement.
Out of Scope Changes Check	✅ Passed	All modifications are confined to updating the regex in engine.py and accompanying tests to support breaking-change syntax, with no unrelated files or logic altered, so no out-of-scope changes are present.

✨ Finishing touches

📝 Generate docstrings

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests
Post copyable unit tests in a comment
Commit unit tests in branch bugfix/fix-301

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

sonarqubecloud · 2025-10-12T21:28:26Z

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

codecov · 2025-10-12T21:29:34Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 87.29%. Comparing base (213b6d2) to head (cd957d9).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #305   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   87.29%   87.29%           
=======================================
  Files           8        8           
  Lines         685      685           
=======================================
  Hits          598      598           
  Misses         87       87

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

codspeed-hq · 2025-10-12T21:30:31Z

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #305 will not alter performance

_{Comparing bugfix/fix-301 (cd957d9) with main (213b6d2)}

Summary

✅ 27 untouched
⏩ 85 skipped¹

85 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

coderabbitai

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

tests/engine_test.py (1)
782-800: LGTM! Tests adequately cover breaking change scenarios.

The two new test cases provide good coverage for the breaking change notation feature:

Without scope: feat!:

With scope: fix(auth)!:

Both tests verify that valid imperative verbs still pass validation with the breaking change marker present.

Consider adding a negative test case to verify that breaking change notation with non-imperative verbs still fails:
def test_validate_with_breaking_change_non_imperative(self):
    """Test validation with breaking change and non-imperative verb."""
    rule = ValidationRule(check="imperative")
    validator = SubjectImperativeValidator(rule)
    context = ValidationContext(stdin_text="feat!: updated authentication system")
    
    with patch("commit_check.util._print_failure"):
        result = validator.validate(context)
        assert result == ValidationResult.FAIL
This would explicitly confirm that the breaking change syntax doesn't bypass imperative mood validation.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 213b6d2 and cd957d9.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

commit_check/engine.py (1 hunks)
tests/engine_test.py (1 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

📓 Path-based instructions (1)

tests/**

📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (.github/copilot-instructions.md)

Ensure tests run via pytest -v and cover commit, branch, author, and CLI behaviors

Files:

tests/engine_test.py

🧠 Learnings (2)

📓 Common learnings

Learnt from: CR
PR: commit-check/commit-check#0
File: .github/copilot-instructions.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-10-03T10:28:06.793Z
Learning: Applies to commit_check/commit.py : Support breaking change notation with ! (e.g., feat!: breaking change)

Learnt from: CR
PR: commit-check/commit-check#0
File: .github/copilot-instructions.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-10-03T10:28:06.793Z
Learning: Applies to commit_check/commit.py : Support optional scope in commits, e.g., feat(api): add endpoint

📚 Learning: 2025-10-03T10:28:06.793Z

Learnt from: CR
PR: commit-check/commit-check#0
File: .github/copilot-instructions.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-10-03T10:28:06.793Z
Learning: Applies to commit_check/commit.py : Support breaking change notation with ! (e.g., feat!: breaking change)

Applied to files:

commit_check/engine.py

🧬 Code graph analysis (1)

tests/engine_test.py (1)

commit_check/engine.py (12)

SubjectImperativeValidator (192-213)

ValidationContext (27-32)

validate (42-44)

validate (100-114)

validate (137-145)

validate (241-250)

validate (287-303)

validate (309-329)

validate (356-370)

validate (393-418)

validate (441-456)

ValidationResult (19-23)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (18)

GitHub Check: install (3.14, ubuntu-24.04)
GitHub Check: install (3.13, windows-latest)
GitHub Check: install (3.13, ubuntu-24.04)
GitHub Check: install (3.13, macos-latest)
GitHub Check: install (3.14, macos-latest)
GitHub Check: install (3.14, windows-latest)
GitHub Check: install (3.11, macos-latest)
GitHub Check: install (3.12, ubuntu-24.04)
GitHub Check: install (3.9, windows-latest)
GitHub Check: install (3.11, windows-latest)
GitHub Check: install (3.10, ubuntu-24.04)
GitHub Check: install (3.11, ubuntu-24.04)
GitHub Check: install (3.12, windows-latest)
GitHub Check: install (3.12, macos-latest)
GitHub Check: install (3.9, macos-latest)
GitHub Check: install (3.9, ubuntu-24.04)
GitHub Check: install (3.10, windows-latest)
GitHub Check: Run benchmarks

🔇 Additional comments (1)

commit_check/engine.py (1)

203-204: LGTM! Regex correctly supports breaking change notation.

The regex update properly adds support for the conventional commit breaking change indicator (!) while maintaining backward compatibility. The pattern correctly handles:

feat!: description

fix(scope)!: description

All existing formats without !

Based on learnings.

fix: update regex to support breaking changes

cd957d9

shenxianpeng requested a review from a team as a code owner October 12, 2025 21:28

github-actions bot added the bug Something isn't working label Oct 12, 2025

coderabbitai bot reviewed Oct 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

shenxianpeng merged commit d0bf5e7 into main Oct 12, 2025
32 checks passed

shenxianpeng deleted the bugfix/fix-301 branch October 12, 2025 21:31

coderabbitai bot mentioned this pull request Dec 15, 2025

fix(subject_imperative): mixed definitions #329

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

fix: update regex to support breaking changes #305

fix: update regex to support breaking changes #305

Uh oh!

shenxianpeng commented Oct 12, 2025 •

edited by coderabbitai bot

Loading

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

sonarqubecloud bot commented Oct 12, 2025

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Oct 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Oct 12, 2025

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Uh oh!

fix: update regex to support breaking changes #305

fix: update regex to support breaking changes #305

Uh oh!

Conversation

shenxianpeng commented Oct 12, 2025 • edited by coderabbitai bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary by CodeRabbit

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 12, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Walkthrough

Changes

Estimated code review effort

Suggested labels

Poem

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

Uh oh!

sonarqubecloud bot commented Oct 12, 2025

Quality Gate passed

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Oct 12, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Oct 12, 2025

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #305 will not alter performance

Summary

Footnotes

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

shenxianpeng commented Oct 12, 2025 •

edited by coderabbitai bot

Loading

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Oct 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading