hugolib: Make RawContent raw again

[bep]

This was a regression introduced in Hugo 0.17.

Fixes #2601

Note: This PR will be benchmarked before merged.

[bep]

OK, this I don't understand, but I have run the test 3 times with about the same result.

benchmark           old ns/op       new ns/op       delta
BenchmarkHugo-4     10807015438     10398554849     -3.78%

benchmark           old allocs     new allocs     delta
BenchmarkHugo-4     43502232       43528773       +0.06%

benchmark           old bytes      new bytes      delta
BenchmarkHugo-4     9128074256     9191810000     +0.70%

We can live with this, me think.

/cc @moorereason

[moorereason]

LGTM for fixing the regression with .RawContent. I, too, am confused by the benchmark results. How is it that allocs only grew +0.06%?

Is your plan to fix the regression here and then deprecate .RawContent later in favor of a markup = "raw" feature (as I mentioned in issue 2601)?

[bep]

is it that allocs only grew +0.06%?

If you have a 5000 page site -- this is 5000 extra allocations, which is very little in the big picture, so that seems just about correct.

I will fix this issue, then create another for your markup = raw-suggestion.

[guilhem]

Is there a chance to see a bugfix version with this PR?

[bep]

Is there a chance to see a bugfix version with this PR?

https://discuss.gohugo.io/t/consider-bug-fix-releases/4748

[guilhem]

@bep when you are talking about "cheaper build", what is the process of releasing?
I don't see any docs or scripts to do this.

If you want to, I can work on a travis hook with goxc to do github releases on tag :)

[bep]

@guilhem the goxc / travis /binaries are only a small part of the build chain (and the easy part, if you look past the Debian / Ubuntu packaging ...)). The "hard part" is the server infrastructure (doc site, theme site ...) etc. that is currently in the hands of @spf13 and not me. But please take this discussion somewhere other than a closed PR.

[guilhem]

this talk was quite informal just to talk pulse before doing a right issue :)

[github-actions]

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.