Cheers! --I should have read your thread all the way through.
That seems to have fixed the rendering problems [although not the font errors, but they should sort themselves out on upload to the live site].
I see the explanation given in your thread was:
I can’t say as that makes it any clearer, as I’ve not kept abreast of Hugo’s latest Page Bundle features but it would have been nice to have the server throw up some kind of error message --and nicer still for a new feature not to break [what must have been many people’s] existing site structure!
Thanks for your help.
REPLY to @bep’s post below, since he locked the thread [not very free-speech-friendly!]
OK. I accept that sometimes changes break stuff. I alluded to that in my previous post. But this was quite a nasty one.
It is hard to give error messages for this situation, as it is nearly impossible to separate from “correct behaviour”
Surely it’s not that difficult to check for the presence of an index.md file at the root of the site content folder and show a "You might want to rename that..." error? After updates, Hugo regularly warns me that certain functions have been renamed or are deprecated, why not a similar warning in this case?
The use of “index.md” pre Hugo 0.32 was not in widespread use
Really? Have you any figures to back that up?
It’s in use on all my Hugo sites -about half a dozen at last count [including a few I’ve built for clients, which I will likely be getting “My site is broken…” emails about, next time they try to update them.
And I’m sure I’m not the only one. Anyone who’s using Hugo to build a site which goes beyond a straightforward blog is likely have been using a static index page.
it was discussed for 6 months before release (I have checked) and clearly noted in the release notes
Well, having ‘been round the block’ a few times with Hugo, I don’t tend to visit the forum that often, as I can usually fix anything that breaks myself, so I missed that discussion.
I do however look at the release notes with every new version but [again, I presume I’m not alone in not in this] that tends to consist of reading the ‘headline items’, not every single word. And even, looking at them again today, I’m hard pushed to see any kind of warning that we will need to rename our index.md pages or our sites will break
Right down the bottom of the release notes page, in the ‘Notes’ section, I find
- Images and other static resources in folders with “_index.md” will have its RelPermalink relative to its page.
- Images and other static resources in or below “index.md” folders will have its RelPermalink relative to its page (respecting permalink settings etc.)
- Content pages in or below “index.md” will not get their own URL, but will be part of the .Resources collection of its page.
I reckon you’d need to do a lot of reading between the lines and have advance knowledge of the new feature to take away from that anything which suggests breaking changes are afoot.