My take on conventional commits

They create the illusion of organization while holding you to a verbose structure that ultimately constrains the natural flow. The "fix:", "feat:", "chore:" prefixes look neat on paper but in practice? They’re a bottleneck that adds zero value beyond making release notes slightly prettier.

Good commit messages don't need a template. A well structured, human readable message tailored to the context of the change is more useful than a prefixed label.

When writing commit messages, I try to think of them like "commands". If you apply this commit to a codebase, the commit message is how you would describe it. For example: if you are adding an image to a page, your commit message should be "Add image to page X", instead of "Image added to page".

Conventional commits encourage superficial adherence to rules rather than toughtful reflection on changes.

Foster a culture where commit messages naturally communicate your intent, without enforcing robotic formats.

I recommend you to read this blog post from Tighten on writing a great pull request and this one this one from Chris Beams on How to Write a Git Commit Message