Skip to content

Add blog post "GopherJS 1.7-1 is released". #55

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Aug 22, 2016

Conversation

dmitshur
Copy link
Member

@dmitshur dmitshur commented Aug 21, 2016

Helps gopherjs/gopherjs#500.

TODOs before merging:

  • Update GopherJS playground to 1.7.
  • Test that the gopherpen project and its instructions still work without issues.
  • Maybe link/mention the playground and gopherpen in the blog post, as places to get started with GopherJS.

Without the Go team creating Go and releasing Go 1.7, GopherJS 1.7-1
would not be possible.

It's also more consistent with the sign off phrase "Happy surfing with
Go 1.7 and GopherJS 1.7-1!"

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.
Copy link
Member

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?

Copy link
Member Author

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)

image

Or maybe remove it altogether? I agree it's not the best first link for people to click on.

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:

Today, we are happy to make two announcements for GopherJS. First, GopherJS now officially supports Go 1.7, which is the current stable release of Go that came out recently.

The link doesn't give me a whole lot / just distracts me.

Copy link
Member Author

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:

  • Instead of adding to the message, it dilutes it and distracts the reader.
  • Motivated readers can still find the relevant issue and background info if they wish.

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.

@neelance
Copy link
Member

LGTM, two comments.


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.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Two minor nits:

I think you want 'were' in this sentence:

Support for many advanced features of the Go language spec, such as goroutines, channels, and select statements, was added over time.

I think this sentence is probably OK, but reads a bit strange to me. I would suggest:

GopherJS has become quite stable and is used +today by many +people for a broad range of projects.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Support for many advanced features of the Go language spec, such as goroutines, channels, and select statements, was added over time.

I stumbled across that sentence, too. But I think it is correct:

Support [...] was added over time.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'll try to simplify it.

@emidoots
Copy link

LGTM aside from inline comments

Remove link from first paragraph because it dilutes the message and is
unhelpful in the context.

Rewrite a paragraph to have a more consistent past tense, and finish it
with the present.

Minor improvements to other sentences.
Because the improvements were done quietly, fewer people would _become_
aware of those improvements. This seems to fit in slightly better.
For people new to GopherJS who may see this post, this gives them some
actionable next steps to perform.

It gives a little more meaning to the sign off phrase.

It also indirectly shows that the GopherJS playground has been updated
for Go 1.7/GopherJS 1.7-1.
@dmitshur dmitshur force-pushed the blog-post-release-1.7-1 branch from 8570dd2 to 43f2ed1 Compare August 22, 2016 00:22
It's unhelpful to use slang/short version of spec. Use the proper word.

It's also inconsistent with the paragraph above, where the full word
was used.
@dmitshur
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks for review comments, I believe I've addressed everything.

It's time to surf. 🏄 Publishing this now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants