refactor(workflow): pr title validation update

[ulfgebhardt]

🍰 Pullrequest

pr title validation update requested by a comment on the implementing PR #1379 (comment)

Adds 4 new types for pr scopes observed in cypht:

• frontend
• backend
• frontend/backend
• backend/frontend

Furhtermore a comprehensive guide was added to the pull request template to make it easier for people to fullfil this requirement.

Example

Issues

• requirements feat(other): update issue templates #1379 (comment)
• relates feat(other): update issue templates #1379
• relates ulfgebhardt/issue-templates@56dc4aa

Todo

• Verify that no scope, observed lately, is missing

[mercihabam]

@ulfgebhardt, thank you for your response to my comment!

Here is my feedback:

• I suggest excluding the scopes "cypht" and "other" as they do not indicate that any specific part of the project has been affected.
• docs sounds more appropriate as a scope compared to docu.
• In the proposed update, we have both frontend/backend and backend/frontend. I recommend keeping only one variation for consistency.
• These additional scopes could be useful: modules/output, modules/handler, tests/unit, and tests/e2e.

[ulfgebhardt]

@ulfgebhardt, thank you for your response to my comment!

Here is my feedback:

• I suggest excluding the scopes "cypht" and "other" as they do not indicate that any specific part of the project has been affected.
• docs sounds more appropriate as a scope compared to docu.
• In the proposed update, we have both frontend/backend and backend/frontend. I recommend keeping only one variation for consistency.
• These additional scopes could be useful: modules/output, modules/handler, tests/unit, and tests/e2e.

I implemented your suggestions, except the removal of other. I can remove it if you want, but its always useful to give people an option to escape things in case you did not think about everything.

Furthermore I suggest to simplify your suggestions further:

• instead of modules/output and modules/handler i suggest to just use modules - or better sigular module
• instead of tests/unit tests/e2e I suggest to use just unit and e2e since your title would be something like test(unit): my test.

Let me know what you think

[mercihabam]

That works for me, please go ahead!

[ulfgebhardt]

That works for me, please go ahead!

Please have another look.

[mercihabam]

Looks good!