3 ms·

I don't think this is a hard problem to solve, it's just outside the scope of the site generator itself. The best way to handle it probably depends on how you d

I don't think this is a hard problem to solve, it's just outside the scope of the site generator itself. The best way to handle it probably depends on how you deploy the site, but one option would be using the at command to either overwrite the existing site files or point a symlink to the updated version of the site: https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/schedule-one-time-commands-unix-tool https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/schedule-one-time-comma...

mooreds 6y ago
Fair point. Maybe I just wish it weren't outside the scope, as it feels like core functionality. But SSGs have a different set of design tradeoffs (the lack of a WYSIWYG editor being another piece of functionality that seems to me to be core to a CMS), so maybe I just need to accept that. I don't think SSGs are all bad, either. I wrote a blog post a few months ago talking about the tradeoffs: https://www.mooreds.com/wordpress/archives/3369 https://www.mooreds.com/wordpress/archives/3369