3 ms·

Show HN: Landing pages in 20 lines of Python

17 points by traviskaufman 5y ago

traviskaufman 5y ago
Background: my co-founder and I built splashgen because we were building many simple landing pages to validate ideas quickly. We're both developers, and didn't want to use (or pay for) Unbounce or Carrd. We also didn't want to copy/paste HTML templates around; that felt too cumbersome. What we did want was to be able to programmatically describe a landing page and have it be generated for us. Hence splashgen. Ask: *if you're a developer that needs to spin up a site to validate an idea quickly, why would/wouldn't you use this?* Your feedback will help us improve the product and decide if it's something we want to expand upon. Thanks!
- mritchie712 5y ago
  Nice job. I'd add an integration or two to the example page at https://splashgen.sh/ https://splashgen.sh/ (e.g. a form).
  - traviskaufman 5y ago
    Thanks! Great suggestion. We have a mailchimp one on https://zenweb.dev https://zenweb.dev (another idea we had) but having it on the actual splash page would show it off better.
- serjester 5y ago
  Why wouldn't I use this? I've built enough validation sites like this that I bought a React boilerplate project. From there changing the text and deploying to Heroku or Vercel takes me an hour or two. I like the idea but I'd get worried about using something that's not extensible. I don't want to have to shoot down ideas on website improvements from the non technical folks strictly because I'm limited by the framework I used. Just me though.
  - traviskaufman 5y ago
    Great feedback regarding extensibility. I'm curious what caused you to build a bunch of validation sites like this? Similar scenario to us maybe?
97-109-107 5y ago
I get the impression that your solution: - is adjacent to using static site generators with a custom template - is right "below" (in the abstraction tree) a headless CMS approach, where you manage multiple landing pages from a central place Currently the way you're positioning this, the distance to either approaches is too close for me to clearly see an advantage. However, it only comes down to personal preferences. Or to put in a different perspective - the advantage of this being simple "loses out" to potential advantages of other approaches and might need something more to stand out.
- traviskaufman 5y ago
  That feedback paints a really clear picture in my head as to how you see us falling into the larger ecosystem; thank you! I'd love to get more clarity into the "advantages" of each type of solution you mentioned above. When would you use a headless CMS vs. a static site generator with a custom template?
  - 97-109-107 5y ago
    I would't say that any of these approaches have inherit advantages, the broader use case context would dictate which approach is more practical long-term.

17 points by traviskaufman 5y ago

Background: my co-founder and I built splashgen because we were building many simple landing pages to validate ideas quickly. We're both developers, and didn't want to use (or pay for) Unbounce or Carrd. We also didn't want to copy/paste HTML templates around; that felt too cumbersome. What we did want was to be able to programmatically describe a landing page and have it be generated for us. Hence splashgen. Ask: *if you're a developer that needs to spin up a site to validate an idea quickly, why would/wouldn't you use this?* Your feedback will help us improve the product and decide if it's something we want to expand upon. Thanks!

mritchie712 5y ago
Nice job. I'd add an integration or two to the example page at https://splashgen.sh/ https://splashgen.sh/ (e.g. a form).
- traviskaufman 5y ago
  Thanks! Great suggestion. We have a mailchimp one on https://zenweb.dev https://zenweb.dev (another idea we had) but having it on the actual splash page would show it off better.
serjester 5y ago
Why wouldn't I use this? I've built enough validation sites like this that I bought a React boilerplate project. From there changing the text and deploying to Heroku or Vercel takes me an hour or two. I like the idea but I'd get worried about using something that's not extensible. I don't want to have to shoot down ideas on website improvements from the non technical folks strictly because I'm limited by the framework I used. Just me though.
- traviskaufman 5y ago
  Great feedback regarding extensibility. I'm curious what caused you to build a bunch of validation sites like this? Similar scenario to us maybe?

97-109-107 5y ago

I get the impression that your solution: - is adjacent to using static site generators with a custom template - is right "below" (in the abstraction tree) a headless CMS approach, where you manage multiple landing pages from a central place Currently the way you're positioning this, the distance to either approaches is too close for me to clearly see an advantage. However, it only comes down to personal preferences. Or to put in a different perspective - the advantage of this being simple "loses out" to potential advantages of other approaches and might need something more to stand out.

traviskaufman 5y ago
That feedback paints a really clear picture in my head as to how you see us falling into the larger ecosystem; thank you! I'd love to get more clarity into the "advantages" of each type of solution you mentioned above. When would you use a headless CMS vs. a static site generator with a custom template?
- 97-109-107 5y ago
  I would't say that any of these approaches have inherit advantages, the broader use case context would dictate which approach is more practical long-term.