Skip to content

Conversation

@bep
Copy link
Member

@bep bep commented Dec 9, 2016

@moorereason @digitalcraftsman @spf13 @anthonyfok and others ... this is just a rough outline. Please edit / add.

@bep bep changed the title Work in progress: O.18 release notes Dec 9, 2016
@digitalcraftsman
Copy link
Member

digitalcraftsman commented Dec 9, 2016

Isn't it worth noting that nodes have been replaced by pages? As far as I know the changes you made are backwards compatible. But certain things might be handled differently by theme maintainers if they are aware of this change.

I glimpsed over the last commits and didn't found this pull requests on the list:

@bep
Copy link
Member Author

bep commented Dec 9, 2016

Isn't it worth noting that nodes have been replaced by pages?

Yes that is the main feature -- but I added that to the release notes when I added the feature (fresh memory), so they do not show up on this diff.

I browsed through the commit log, but I obviously missed something. I have checked the "allow edits from other maintainers" -- couldn't you just update the file (with the new items you found + formatting + editing, if you have time ...)?

We have a week++ until release so no rush.

@digitalcraftsman
Copy link
Member

Sure, I'll add them. I'm not in hurry but just wanted to highlight the additions rather sooner than later 😉

@bep
Copy link
Member Author

bep commented Dec 9, 2016

I notice that some of the "fixes" is really "improvements", but we will fix that, eventually.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is true, but it may confuse some users. I deliberately kept all from RSS and right unexported, because they are only of internal interest (for now) -- these pages does not show up in any of the page collections and as such these kinds cannot be used for anything practical for end users. So I suggest just mentioning those in parens or something)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll tweak it shortly. Thanks

@bep
Copy link
Member Author

bep commented Dec 12, 2016

We should add some lines about the performance:

benchmark           old ns/op       new ns/op       delta
BenchmarkHugo-4     30747531411     10372935501     -66.26%

benchmark           old allocs     new allocs     delta
BenchmarkHugo-4     88370619       43654211       -50.60%

benchmark           old bytes       new bytes      delta
BenchmarkHugo-4     12431663920     9200452080     -25.99%

I have run the numbers twice, and the error margin seems to be just a couple of percent on my MacBook, so this is impressive.

This is https://github.com/bep/hugo-benchmark

Maybe add one line in the same breath about the partialCached, which can be very good for complex but static partials.

@moorereason moorereason added this to the v0.18 milestone Dec 14, 2016
@bep bep merged commit 4de808a into gohugoio:master Dec 19, 2016
@bep bep deleted the relnotes-018 branch April 18, 2017 09:19
@github-actions
Copy link

This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 14, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

3 participants