5 ms·

But why this over another site generator? Metalsmith has total flexability, Lektor has a web UI for those who dislike writing in plain text, Jekyll has simplici

But why this over another site generator? Metalsmith has total flexability, Lektor has a web UI for those who dislike writing in plain text, Jekyll has simplicity... Hugo doesn't really seem to have any advantages.

ausjke 10y ago
there are at least 10+ good static site engines, why is Hugo better? I tried many of them and Hugo definitely has nothing to stand out in my experience.
- musha68k 10y ago
  It might sound strange saying this in 2016 but during development markup generation speed can be an issue for projects of certain sizes...
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    That might be a reason.
- Volt 10y ago
  1. Fast 2. Modern
  - bansheehash 10y ago
    What do you mean by "modern"?
- angry-hacker 10y ago
  Speed and portability for me. I feel most comfortable with pelican but with huge sites it gets kind of slow.
- spf13 10y ago
  Disclaimer: I am the creator of Hugo. Trying to provide an impartial perspective here for the readers. Everyone has different needs and tastes so no tool works for everyone. Here's how I see Hugo's strengths and weaknesses. I'd love to know what other people see are Hugo's strengths and weaknesses. Hugo's key differentiators: 1. Ease of install 2. Speed (critical for large sites) 3. Integrated live-reload while editing in near realtime 4. Multilingual capabilities 5. Flexible 6. Very strong community 7. Very good & comprehensive documentation (but not perfect...yet) Hugo struggles with: 1. Not integrated with Github like Jekyll (though webhooks solve this to a large degree) 2. No plugin support 3. Media & Asset processing not tightly integrated There are many solutions that work around Hugo's limitations, some which are quite elegant, but at the end of the day they are workarounds and require external tooling. We would love to address these weaknesses in upcoming releases as best we can. If you are interested in helping we would love to have help.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    Thank you for the summation. Speed is definitely an adantage.
  - alxndr 10y ago
    Just wanna say thanks for having RSS support!
hk__2 10y ago
> But why this over another site generator? Metalsmith has total flexability, Lektor has a web UI for those who dislike writing in plain text Hugo predates those two. It got its first tagged release almost a year before Metalsmith and two years before Lektor.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  That doesn't mean I should use it now.

ausjke 10y ago

there are at least 10+ good static site engines, why is Hugo better? I tried many of them and Hugo definitely has nothing to stand out in my experience.

musha68k 10y ago
It might sound strange saying this in 2016 but during development markup generation speed can be an issue for projects of certain sizes...
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  That might be a reason.
Volt 10y ago
1. Fast 2. Modern
- bansheehash 10y ago
  What do you mean by "modern"?
angry-hacker 10y ago
Speed and portability for me. I feel most comfortable with pelican but with huge sites it gets kind of slow.
spf13 10y ago
Disclaimer: I am the creator of Hugo. Trying to provide an impartial perspective here for the readers. Everyone has different needs and tastes so no tool works for everyone. Here's how I see Hugo's strengths and weaknesses. I'd love to know what other people see are Hugo's strengths and weaknesses. Hugo's key differentiators: 1. Ease of install 2. Speed (critical for large sites) 3. Integrated live-reload while editing in near realtime 4. Multilingual capabilities 5. Flexible 6. Very strong community 7. Very good & comprehensive documentation (but not perfect...yet) Hugo struggles with: 1. Not integrated with Github like Jekyll (though webhooks solve this to a large degree) 2. No plugin support 3. Media & Asset processing not tightly integrated There are many solutions that work around Hugo's limitations, some which are quite elegant, but at the end of the day they are workarounds and require external tooling. We would love to address these weaknesses in upcoming releases as best we can. If you are interested in helping we would love to have help.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  Thank you for the summation. Speed is definitely an adantage.
- alxndr 10y ago
  Just wanna say thanks for having RSS support!

hk__2 10y ago

> But why this over another site generator? Metalsmith has total flexability, Lektor has a web UI for those who dislike writing in plain text Hugo predates those two. It got its first tagged release almost a year before Metalsmith and two years before Lektor.

qwertyuiop924 10y ago
That doesn't mean I should use it now.