Add support for Azure DevOps

[amd989]

Is there an existing issue or pull request for this?

• I have searched the existing issues and pull requests
• I've created feat(integration): ✨ add support for azure devops #1283

Feature description

git-cliff currently supports GitHub, GitLab, Gitea, and Bitbucket integrations, but lacks support for Azure DevOps; a widely used git hosting platform by some enterprises. The feature request would be to add support for this integration to leverage the same remote integration features available for other platforms.

Desired solution

Given that the integration is created, I would like to be able to configure Azure DevOps section in the git-cliff toml file to allow communication with it to retrieve information for the commits and pull requests. Much like the others...

For this purpose, I propose the following PR with the changes required to support this. #1283

Alternatives considered

A toml file can be "hacked" to directly reference azure devops repo site (in place of say github.com). Which will give git-cliff generated changelogs a "basic" integration to things like version comparisons and commit links.

But without a formal integration, it will never be able to retrieve committer information like the other websites. Since it requires proper integration with ADO's REST API.

Additional context

No response

[welcome]

Thanks for opening your first issue at git-cliff! Be sure to follow the issue template! ⛰️

[ognis1205]

cc: @orhun

Hi, thanks for the PR and your effort on this! I have a few questions and points for discussion before we proceed:

1. Usage perspective: How widely used is Azure DevOps among potential git-cliff users?
2. Enterprise focus: Compared to other integrations (GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Gitea), Azure DevOps feels more enterprise-oriented. This could make the support niche and might increase maintenance cost if similar integrations are added in the future.
3. Impact & benefit: What tangible benefits or impact do you anticipate if this PR is merged? I'm trying to gauge the overall value.

Looking ahead, another possible direction could be refactoring git-cliff-core's backend support API to reduce future maintenance cost. If we go down that path, could the insights gained from your implementation still be leveraged?

I understand that some of these questions might be hard to answer, but I'd really like to hear your thoughts constructively, including any perspective on merging the PR.

[amd989]

Hi there, once again thank you for taking a look into this.

1. This is definitely a tough question to answer. I don’t know how many users are currently on Azure DevOps, as Microsoft doesn’t share any metrics about it. So, the short answer is: I don’t know. Personally, I’d be interested in using it since it would pair well with conventional commits. But if it’s not supported, I wouldn’t even bother. I started using git-cliff because it somewhat works with ADO if you tweak the cliff.toml a bit, but it still throws a lot of integration errors due to not being able to communicate with ADO directly. Hence the PR. it’s a bit of a catch-22. The ADO user feedback page has 100k feedback items in total, with 6k added just in the last year, I'd say there are lots of people that could benefit from this.

2. While I don’t completely disagree with this statement, I’d argue it’s the same for the other supported providers. They’re not catering to free users; they just want you to try their services enough to entice you into paying for premium tiers. As I mentioned earlier, Gitlab's free tier is very similar to ADO's free tier. In fact, all the providers you listed, except GitHub, offer the same kind of limited free tier. So why is it acceptable for them to be integrated with git-cliff but not ADO? If anything, at least we know there is a known userbase (lots of big enterprise companies) that could benefit from this tool if it's advertised as supported. But this is not up to me.

3. What benefits do I receive? The same as those offered by other Git integrations. These typically include changelog files with commits linked to their repositories, version comparisons, and author information for each commit. I am simply requesting feature parity. I'm trying to bring awareness to this tool inside of r/azuredevops but unless this support gets added there is no reason to even try it.

I can’t gauge adoption since I don’t own git-cliff, and I’m not sure if there’s any usage tracking comparing one host to another. I was really excited to see this product potentially solve my company’s changelog generation problem but ended up disappointed that it wasn’t fully integrated with Azure DevOps. My thinking was that if the support existed, more people would start using it.

But ultimately is up to you. I just completed integrating the PR with the changes in #1272, that developer had to refactor all those integrations if he wanted the PR to go through. Which I ended up applying to my PR as well. Going forward this is just another one of those implementations that need to be changed if anyone does yet another refactor.

[linus-skold]

I think having git-cliff with proper devops support would be fantastic as I use devops at work and I'm currently pushing for every project to use git-cliff for changelog automation.
While the road to conventional commits might be long, having git-cliff in place helps with the process because more will see the benefit of the structure that conventional could provide.

So I for one would love to have it integrated properly, and talking to others who use devops its clear that it would be greatly appreciated.

[orhun]

Thanks for sharing the insight! I think it makes sense to add the Azure DevOps integration support 👍🏼

[orhun]

Now added in #1283

Will try to create a new release in the following weeks