Skip to content
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

noscript fallback solution slows down site generation #17

Closed
tiagoamaro opened this issue Aug 22, 2015 · 5 comments
Closed

noscript fallback solution slows down site generation #17

tiagoamaro opened this issue Aug 22, 2015 · 5 comments

Comments

@tiagoamaro
Copy link

Hi,

First, thanks a lot for this Jekyll core extension :)

Issue

After updating to version v1.3.1, I've noticed that generating static websites on my local machine were taking 5 sec to 20 sec. After rolling back to v1.2.1, my website took 0.1 sec to generate.

I started investigating, and found out that the new noscript fallback feature is to blame (#7), since it depends on a connection, instead of handling everything locally.

I understand that this feature is desirable for RSS feeds and many public facing websites, but Jekyll's speed is one of its great features.

Is it interesting having an option where users could deactivate the noscript fallback? something like:

{% gist user/1234567 foo.js noscript:false %}
@pathawks
Copy link
Member

It seems like, if noscript is to be deactivated, it would be best to make it a sitewide option.

@parkr
Copy link
Member

parkr commented Aug 22, 2015

gist:
  noscript: false

?

@pathawks
Copy link
Member

Seems reasonable to me.

🎄 ?

@parkr
Copy link
Member

parkr commented Aug 22, 2015

There isn't a solution I really like in this case. On one hand, the HTML is true. On the other, it becomes slow by default. Jekyll 3 won't have this issue because jekyll-gist won't be bundled by default.

@benbalter: any thoughts here?

@benbalter
Copy link
Contributor

@benbalter: any thoughts here?

The namespaced config var makes sense to me. Opened #26 before seeing this, which comes at the same problem from a different direction. In any event, I suspect it should be disabled locally.

@parkr parkr closed this as completed in #29 Dec 1, 2015
@jekyll jekyll locked and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 27, 2017
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants