Add blog post "GopherJS 1.7-1 is released". #55
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ | ||
| --- | ||
| layout: post | ||
| title: "GopherJS 1.7-1 is released" | ||
| date: 2016-08-21 | ||
| author: Dmitri Shuralyov | ||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| Hello gophers, | ||
|
|
||
| Today, we are happy to make two announcements for GopherJS. First, GopherJS now [officially supports Go 1.7](https://github.com/gopherjs/gopherjs/issues/475), which is the current stable release of Go that came out recently. Second, GopherJS has its first named version attached to it, and we're calling it GopherJS 1.7-1. This makes it possible to have a release history tracking major changes and additions between versions. | ||
|
|
||
| The support for Go 1.7 means that GopherJS 1.7-1 requires Go 1.7 and no longer works with Go 1.6. It's highly recommended to be using the latest version of Go and GopherJS, but if you cannot update from Go 1.6 right away, you should continue to use GopherJS on the [`go1.6` branch](https://github.com/gopherjs/gopherjs/commits/go1.6). | ||
|
|
||
| GopherJS 1.7-1 continues to support nearly everything of the [Go language specification](https://golang.org/ref/spec), including goroutines. Please consult the [package compatibility table](https://github.com/gopherjs/gopherjs/blob/master/doc/packages.md) to see which standard library packages are supported. Everything from the previous Go 1.6 version is still supported, as are many additions to Go 1.7, but there are some exceptions. For example, the new [`reflect.StructOf` function](https://godoc.org/reflect#StructOf) is not yet supported, but [issue #499](https://github.com/gopherjs/gopherjs/issues/499) tracks its implementation status. If you run into any bugs or discrepancies with what the compatibility table says, please [file an issue](https://github.com/gopherjs/gopherjs/issues). | ||
|
|
||
| Installation or upgrade instructions remain the same, even though GopherJS has a version number now. To get the latest official stable release, please follow the instructions at https://github.com/gopherjs/gopherjs#installation-and-usage. You can confirm that you have the right version if `gopherjs version` prints `GopherJS 1.7-1`. | ||
|
|
||
| Over the last few years, GopherJS has become increasingly complete and stable. Support for many advanced features of the Go language spec, such as goroutines, channels, and select statements, was added over time. More and more of the viable standard library packages would have all their tests pass and become officially supported. Many bugs were reported, investigated and fixed. GopherJS has become quite stable and is used by many for a broad range of projects. | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Two minor nits: I think you want 'were' in this sentence:
I think this sentence is probably OK, but reads a bit strange to me. I would suggest:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I stumbled across that sentence, too. But I think it is correct:
There was a problem hiding this comment. I'll try to simplify it. |
||
|
|
||
| However, many of those improvements to GopherJS were done quietly and internally, so only developers and people who follow the project very closely would be aware. Without a version number and release history, it's harder for newcomers or people waiting for a stable release to have insight on the readiness state of GopherJS. With this version number and future release history, we hope to better communicate the maturity level of GopherJS and that you can get started with it today. | ||
|
|
||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Reading this at face value, it sounds wrong. Suggestion:
|
||
| In closing, we would like to thank everyone who contributed to this release of GopherJS. The Go team created and released Go 1.7. Richard Musiol created and implemented the core parts of GopherJS and Go 1.7 support. Many people have contributed code and bug fixes, reported/investigated/helped reproduce issues, created libraries and wrappers for various browser APIs. Everyone's effort helped get GopherJS to where it is today, giving us the opportunity to write front-end code in Go which will run in all modern browsers. See [list of code contributors](https://github.com/gopherjs/gopherjs/graphs/contributors) and [list of closed issues](https://github.com/gopherjs/gopherjs/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aclosed). We welcome all help; if you'd like to get involved, see the [community section](https://github.com/gopherjs/gopherjs#community). If you have a good experience with GopherJS, tell your fellow gophers about it! | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this sentence correct? Shouldn't it be There was a problem hiding this comment. I believe it's correct, but English isn't my first language. It could be rephrased to be more like your suggested alternatives, but I'd do "helped with getting" instead of just "helped getting". That said, I think the current version is correct and simple, so unless that's not the case, I'm okay with keeping it as is. There was a problem hiding this comment. I think it's technically correct. Still, it reads strange to me. I would use pretense:
|
||
|
|
||
| Happy surfing with Go 1.7 and GopherJS 1.7-1! | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is the link to the issue useful for readers?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe, maybe not. It's shows that the canonical issue tracking GopherJS' support for Go 1.7 is now resolved.
Would it be better if I updated it to point to that "event"? I.e.:
gopherjs/gopherjs#475 (comment)
Or maybe remove it altogether? I agree it's not the best first link for people to click on.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would remove the link and bold the text:
The link doesn't give me a whole lot / just distracts me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, agree. I wanted the link to be an optional thing for people to click on to find more background information, but:
I don't think I'll use bold, as that may seem like a "cheap trick". Instead, by removing the link, and having this message delivered in the 2nd sentence, I hope it'll be very visible and seen by readers without having to resort to bolding.
I'll give it and try and we can see how it looks.