Tabs vs spaces don't matter they are equivalent.
But consistency is only better when it is an improvement.
It is fundamentally important that convential commit is better for adopting it to be an improvement.
After all in your example wasting the first four characters of your commits with poop would objectively reduce the quality of your commit history, whether or not it was consistent.
Absolutely! Which means we can also agree that conventional commit is objectively better than No System For Their Commits At All, which is what 99.9% of people are actually choosing between when evaluating conventional commit. They aren’t looking at conventional commit vs Some Better Way, they are looking at “we have no standardization of commit messages” vs “we have standardization of commit messages”.
For the 0.1% people for whom that’s not good enough, one hundred percent agree that these people should be pursuing better solutions.
I was quite clear you are presupposing it is better without actually justifying that.
"Some standard is better than no standard" isn't generally true, it has some requirements.
Just to nitpick (because what else is this thread about? :))
They aren't equivalent! Tabs carry more semantic information than spaces. 1 Tab character == 1 Level of nesting
Space-based systems _can_ provide the equivalent semantic information if they are 100% consistent.
...but part of the argument in favor of spaces is that they allow an escape hatch of the strict indentation in order to allow pleasing visual alignments.
E.g. foo(//long function call\n\t//more parameters)