killed-by-microsoft VS standard-version

> P.S. Do we make "jokes" about Microsoft killing things off like we do with Google?

Well someone went ahead and made https://killedbymicrosoft.info/

There is https://killedbymicrosoft.info/, though it seems to be missing a lot of older examples like MSN Explorer. They also don't seem to include product renames like the Google one does.

You might want to check https://killedbymicrosoft.info/

Without a source mentioned, I assume you refer to this[1]?

A comparison shows most products that should be dead are on that list.

G, on the other hand, has products actively used and loved by users.

[1] https://killedbymicrosoft.info/

Inb4 new entry in killedbymicrosoft.info. /s

Saved by Microsoft, like Nokia, Skype, Rare etc.pp.

> They have a tendency to simply discard products left and right.

I guess this site could be of interest to some, to have a look at some of the products: https://killedby.tech/

Google has a separate site here as well: https://killedbygoogle.com/

Microsoft also has a site like that: https://killedbymicrosoft.info/

I tried looking up one for Amazon or AWS projects, but only unrelated news articles came up.

I don't really have a horse in the race, though, since all three of the big platforms (and others like Oracle Cloud) are outside of my price point and all my personal projects run on smaller simple VPS providers. From what I can tell, there is not a single large corporation out there with the commitment to never kill a product of theirs and support everything in perpetuity.

Someone made https://killedbymicrosoft.info/

Dive deeper into the world of Husky with the official documentation. Explore the capabilities of Standard Version through its comprehensive documentation. Unravel the mysteries of semantic-release with its detailed documentation. Discover the versatility of bumpp with its comprehensive documentation.

We can use standard-version tool to generate a changelog, bump the version of app and create a new tag automatically.

There are many great tools to help with automation here, some of them are action-semantic-pull-request to enforce conventional commits and standard version to bump the version and create a changelog according to the conventional commits.

I tried gitmoji and followed Make everyone in your project write beautiful commit messages using commitlint and commitizen by @sohandutta, but end up using the setting in this article because it's not compatible to changelog generation of standard-version (Ref: Issue #859)

As a bonus point, the issues you create in your repository can also serve as part of the documentation. You can outline new features there and you will even be able to generate changelogs from the merged pull requests (like I do using conventional-changelog/standard-version).

There’s also a husky precommit hook with ESlint and Prettier fixing and formatting changed code on every commit with lint-staged which makes sure malformed code doesn't even make it to the Pull Request. Combined with standard-version and strict commit messages it makes releasing and changelog generation a breeze. For a contributor the workflow is as smooth as:

But you can also automate even more, if, for example, you write according to Conventional Commits, you can also automate the creation of tags using the standard-version library.

# Changelog All notable changes to this project will be documented in this file. See \[standard-version\](https://github.com/conventional-changelog/standard-version) for commit guidelines. ## 1.1.0 (2021-07-12) ### Features * **new-feature:** add a new-feature to our project 11c0322

Standard Version

So this is like standard-version with less features?