Gitmoji: Add 🔨 for work related to build scripts and other build tooling

[sarencurrie-tvx]

Hello @carloscuesta :sunglasses:!

• Emoji: 🔨 :
• Code: :hammer:
• Work related to build scripts and other build tooling

This would cover cases that don't really fit into the current CI emoji, (💚 for fixing a failing build and 👷 for adding a CI build system).

🔨 makes sense as it is already used as an icon for "build" in a lot of software.

Other alternatives could be ⚙️ or 🛠 but they might be better left for other pruposes in the future.

[sarencurrie-tvx]

🛠 has already been propsed in #214, which might lead to clashes.

[johannchopin]

Love the idea for Adding or updating build script/tool :+1: What do you think about this idea @carloscuesta ?

[carloscuesta]

Isn’t this covered with :wrench:?

[johannchopin]

IMHO there a difference between 'configuration' file and 'build' script. Build will be more precise and is not necessary a conf file. Example the self written scripts file to build a package using node like React do. Some files like setupTests.build.js are not really a conf file.

[vhoyer]

Generally in those situations I tend to use :construction: for when I don't know what I'm doing and waiting CI to give me an error, and :green_heart: when I know whats wrong and am actively fixing a bug in the pipeline.

When messing only with local build stuff, I tend to use the :wrench:. And if you think like a build script is the definition of how a thing is going to be build, its really a configuration of the build, right?

I don't necessarily think it's a bad idea, I kinda like it actually, but do we really need it? :sweat_smile: I just like to present an opposing point of view, for us to double check what we are doing before we do it :smile:

[johannchopin]

For me a configuration file is how it will be build, so only instruction without any code (like a .json or a .js using a template). A build script is for me only code an logic like this file. So to resume:

🔧 Configuration file:

{ 
  "name" : "foo", 
  "version" : "1.2.3",
  "description" : "A packaged foo fooer for fooing foos"
}

🔨 Build file:

'use strict';

process.on('unhandledRejection', err => {
  throw err;
});

const chalk = require('chalk');
const runFlow = require('../flow/runFlow');
const inlinedHostConfigs = require('../shared/inlinedHostConfigs');

// This script is using `flow status` for a quick check with a server.
// Use it for local development.

const primaryRenderer = inlinedHostConfigs.find(
  info => info.isFlowTyped && info.shortName === process.argv[2]
);
if (!primaryRenderer) {
  console.log(
    'The ' +
      chalk.red('yarn flow') +
      ' command now requires you to pick a primary renderer:'
  );

// ....

IMHO it's not enough to use 🔧 for the build file since there are really different. What do you think? 🤔

[vhoyer]

ok, seens cool, will we add it, them? is it well suported by bitbucket, gitlab, github, ... I can test it on gitlab (have an account there 😅, but I don't have on on bitbucket :D ) (just checked it does work on gitlab :D)

[johannchopin]

@vhoyer I don't have one yet but I will check it asap :+1: I add this task to the ToDo :rocket:

[johannchopin]

@vhoyer It's supported by BitBucket 🎉 So is it ok to implement it @carloscuesta, @vhoyer?

[vhoyer]

I think so :D

[carloscuesta]

Looks good!