refactor: set default_install_hook_types

[12rambau]

Description

Since pre-commit 2.18.0, it is possible to tell pre-commit which hook to install directly from the .pre-commit-config.yaml file. Thus I update the said file to apply the hooks according to the docs: pre-commit install -t pre-commit -t pre-push -t commit-msg. I also updated the pre-commit version to make sure this parameter is available and finally updated the contributing documentation to make sure people simply use the pre-commit installcommand.

bonus: there was a typo that I corrected (it's "stageS")

Checklist

• Run ./scripts/format and ./scripts/test locally to ensure this change passes linter check and test
• Test the changes on the local machine manually
• Update the documentation for the change

[12rambau]

it needs #607 to be solved first as this requires at least 3.7

[woile]

Thanks for the PR! Could you point this PR to v3 branch? because of the 3.7 dep

[12rambau]

Thanks for the PR! Could you point this PR to v3 branch? because of the 3.7 dep

done

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 100.00% and project coverage change: +0.04 🎉

Comparison is base (1a1e73b) 97.37% compared to head (1153908) 97.42%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## master #697 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 97.37% 97.42% +0.04%  ========================================== Files 42 42 Lines 2022 2022 ========================================== + Hits 1969 1970 +1 + Misses 53 52 -1 

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	97.42% <100.00%> (+0.04%)	⬆️

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

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
commitizen/__version__.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[woile]

Would you mind rebasing on top of v3? Thanks!

[12rambau]

isn't it already the case ?

[woile]

No, v3 was merged, you can see all kind of unrelated commits in the list.

You can follow this instructions to rebase: #686 (comment)

[12rambau]

sorry I'm used to work in repositories where we squash merge PR so this is not considered as an issue.

[12rambau]

not sure I did the right thing but THB it's a super small modifcation. merge squash it it wil make everyone's life easier.

Also the PR will look strange but upon merging, git resolves the duplicates commits (as they have the same hash) so why rebasing ?

[Lee-W]

Thanks @12rambau . This looks great!

@woile I'm planning on merging this one today.