7 ms·

>I think your response would be unfair. I don't think so. The author actually gave themselves a weird goal - to use Wordpress as the text editor, and export/co

>I think your response would be unfair. I don't think so. The author actually gave themselves a weird goal - to use Wordpress as the text editor, and export/copy the static content to github. I'm not sure why they would do that, but OK! In the end, their problem wasn't with the workflow but with setting up local version of Wordpress (why? why not use a hosted version of Wordpress????), PHP, Apache, MySQL and FTP(!!). WordPress isn't actually that hard to setup. It's a little harder on Windows, because setting up PHP on Windows just isn't as natural as on Linux but XAMPP makes it as easy as possible. >Should 'blog writing' software really have such a greater barrier of entry? But it doesn't. You have a plethora of (free) hosted blogging solutions. You could also get private hosting with the LAMP stack already pre-installed and configured.

manigandham 6y ago
Why someone would do this: Wordpress has a solid editor, lots of plugins, and is used by millions so the workflow is well tested. The resulting pages are a perfect fit as static content. You can accomplish this by using a CDN that caches everything, or use plugins that export static files like WP2Static, or use integrations with static site frameworks like Gatsby that treat WP as a CMS. But yes, doing it all from scratch yourself is probably not worth it, especially if you're unfamiliar with the tech.
- macspoofing 6y ago
  >Why someone would do this: Wordpress has a solid editor, lots of plugins, and is used by millions so the workflow is well tested. Sure - why not. The question, why do you need to host it locally? You can just create a free account on wordpress.com, or get a private hosted solution for peanuts and with the LAMP stack already configured.
  - manigandham 6y ago
    Yes, that's what the last sentence is about.
  - disgruntledphd2 6y ago
    But to be fair, the authors core point is correct - running Wordpress locally and then deploying to the internet is an absolute tire-fire. For context my wife uses wordpress to build various sites. I got lumped with the task of moving this online. It was super painful, as WP encodes the URL name (i.e. localhost) flipping everywhere. I eventually resolved this by editing the tables which stored the URLS (fortunately, as a DS I know SQL) and doing some sed on various files that cached the URL. I now refuse to do this, and set her up online with a website before she does any work, because moving it is so painful.
    - hunter2_ 6y ago
      https://wordpress.org/support/article/changing-the-site-url/ https://wordpress.org/support/article/changing-the-site-url/
      - disgruntledphd2 6y ago
        Many packages store the raw URLs in the DB, and don't respect the change of that setting. At least that was my experience. I did try the obvious things first, to be fair.
        tacone 6y ago
        You need to use wp-cli to carefully find and replace urls and filesystem paths inside the db. Many professionals don't even know about it. Another way is to perform the find and replace with PhpMyAdmin.
        tacone 6y ago
        Forget what I said about PhpMyAdmin, you can't edit serialized blobs easily. Wp-cli is the way to do it.
        disgruntledphd2 6y ago
        Or you could just use SQL (which is what I did).
  - forgotmypw17 6y ago
    >why do you need to host it locally? offline editing?

manigandham 6y ago

Why someone would do this: Wordpress has a solid editor, lots of plugins, and is used by millions so the workflow is well tested. The resulting pages are a perfect fit as static content. You can accomplish this by using a CDN that caches everything, or use plugins that export static files like WP2Static, or use integrations with static site frameworks like Gatsby that treat WP as a CMS. But yes, doing it all from scratch yourself is probably not worth it, especially if you're unfamiliar with the tech.

macspoofing 6y ago
>Why someone would do this: Wordpress has a solid editor, lots of plugins, and is used by millions so the workflow is well tested. Sure - why not. The question, why do you need to host it locally? You can just create a free account on wordpress.com, or get a private hosted solution for peanuts and with the LAMP stack already configured.
- manigandham 6y ago
  Yes, that's what the last sentence is about.
- disgruntledphd2 6y ago
  But to be fair, the authors core point is correct - running Wordpress locally and then deploying to the internet is an absolute tire-fire. For context my wife uses wordpress to build various sites. I got lumped with the task of moving this online. It was super painful, as WP encodes the URL name (i.e. localhost) flipping everywhere. I eventually resolved this by editing the tables which stored the URLS (fortunately, as a DS I know SQL) and doing some sed on various files that cached the URL. I now refuse to do this, and set her up online with a website before she does any work, because moving it is so painful.
  - hunter2_ 6y ago
    https://wordpress.org/support/article/changing-the-site-url/ https://wordpress.org/support/article/changing-the-site-url/
    - disgruntledphd2 6y ago
      Many packages store the raw URLs in the DB, and don't respect the change of that setting. At least that was my experience. I did try the obvious things first, to be fair.
      - tacone 6y ago
        You need to use wp-cli to carefully find and replace urls and filesystem paths inside the db. Many professionals don't even know about it. Another way is to perform the find and replace with PhpMyAdmin.
        tacone 6y ago
        Forget what I said about PhpMyAdmin, you can't edit serialized blobs easily. Wp-cli is the way to do it.
        disgruntledphd2 6y ago
        Or you could just use SQL (which is what I did).
- forgotmypw17 6y ago
  >why do you need to host it locally? offline editing?