fix(changelog): include the root commit when --latest is used with one tag

[rarescosma]

Description, Motivation and Context

This is a proof of concept implementation for the fix of including the root commit of a repository when git-cliff is called with the --latest flag and only ONE tag exists in the repository.

Ranges passed to to Repository::commits are left-exclusive. This works well when we have two or more tags:

- sha0 (old_tag)
- sha1
- sha2
- sha3 (new_tag)

We'll get the range argument sha0..sha3, which will make the ::commits call capture only the sha1, sha2 and sha3 commits, which is both expected and great.

However, when dealing with a first release, and a single tag, we'd still like the root commit of the repository to be included in the report. Think of it as having a tag before the root commit itself.

In this case, with the current implementation of ::commits we get the range root_sha..single_tag_sha which, being left-exclusive, will exclude the root commit from the report.

My implementation addresses this by adding a flag to ::commits to tell it to include the root commit explicitly. When this boolean flag is present, we chop the range and include everything up to the ..single_tag_sha.

How Has This Been Tested?

Added both a unit test and adapted the test-latest-with-one-tag fixture for the integration tests.

Types of Changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• Documentation (no code change)
• Refactor (refactoring production code)
• Other

Checklist:

• My code follows the code style of this project.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly. NOTE: unsure where to update this, but would gladly do.
• I have formatted the code with rustfmt.
• I checked the lints with clippy.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

[welcome]

Thanks for opening this pull request! Please check out our contributing guidelines! ⛰️

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 33.33333% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 40.06%. Comparing base (f5c39a2) to head (b5ecc35).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
git-cliff/src/lib.rs	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
git-cliff-core/src/repo.rs	66.67%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #901      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   40.10%   40.06%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files          21       21              
  Lines        1671     1675       +4     
==========================================
+ Hits          670      671       +1     
- Misses       1001     1004       +3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unit-tests	40.06% <33.34%> (-0.03%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[orhun]

Looks good! The implementation could be simplified a bit :)

[orhun]

btw can you revert fa85e95

those are not in the scope of this PR

[rarescosma]

Hi, I think the main linting configuration drifted a bit, so I included an extra commit to make the "pedantic" clippy lints pass. Also, not sure what's going on with the "Check NodeJS tarball" check. Everything else seems green. 🥳

[rarescosma]

btw can you revert fa85e95

those are not in the scope of this PR

Sure, np

[orhun]

Thanks!

[welcome]

Congrats on merging your first pull request! ⛰️