3 ms·

There's some irony in ditching all the things in favour of none of the things when actually the likely answer is some of the things... But the whole static sit

• john-aj 7y ago
  > fine if you're learning stuff by doing it but for god's sake don't go suggesting it's "easy"... This is exactly what I’ve come to realize. Static site generators are not at all as simple, easy or intuitive as you might think.
  • okaleniuk 7y ago
    And they only automate the trivial stuff anyway. I spend most of the time on writing, editing, then programming, and only then typing the text and doing the layout. The last 5% of that could be automated, but then I wouldn't be able to write things down from my phone while traveling, or directly from my CHIP when exploring ARM-related things.
    • dmje 7y ago
      I spend most of the time on writing, editing... And this is the really important point. If developers spent nearly as much time thinking about the important bit: their words / grammar / spelling / structure - as they did about which static site generator to use - we'd see a monumental improvement in communication. There are so many developer articles / blog posts which are just terrible - sometimes because of language issues, yes, but more often than not just poor writing and badly thought out arguments. But, you know, it's ok because they're using TheLatestStaticGenerator :-)
• yoz-y 7y ago
  It can be easier than installing and maintaining a cms and definitely is easier (maybe not simpler) than writing everything out in plain HTML and then gluing it every time you need to change the footer. Depending on the generator you chose, it might be a single binary rather than a gazillion of tools.
• grecht 7y ago
  I use hugo (single binary) with Github and Netlify. When I push to the master branch, Netlify automatically builds the website and publishes it on my domain. Sure, not as accessible as Medium, but it’s pretty simple.