6 ms·

What do people use besides Jekyll?

by Exuma 5y ago

moreoutput 5y ago
https://www.11ty.dev/ https://www.11ty.dev/ I'm doing a non trivial project with eleventy in my free time -- works well.
bilal4hmed 5y ago
Ive been using Hugo
cproctor 5y ago
I've been using Hugo as well. I used Pelican (Python port of Jekyll) for a long time, but Hugo is so much more performant and has a larger ecosystem at this point. The main downside is that the Hugo documentation is sometimes terse and snarky.
- firecall 5y ago
  With regards to performance, I used Hugo like 3 or 4 years ago now, and it was insanely fast! Compared to really sluggish build times with Jekyll/Ruby it was incredible! Some sites went from 10s of seconds to what felt like instant build! However, with new versions of Ruby and M1 Macs, I dont notice build lag in Jekyll anymore! And overall, I much preferred Jekyll and the way it structured sites, template and includes! :-)
- shusaku 5y ago
  I switched my blog from Jekyll to Pelican recently after getting sick of constant ruby package versioning issues. It’s pretty nice, though maybe not as good for getting your site to appear on google search
Xavdidtheshadow 5y ago
My work has moved largely from Ruby to JS, so I've been enjoying Gatsby! It's probably overkill for simple sites, but I like how customizable it is.
- jaredcwhite 5y ago
  For React-based projects, I would advocate for Next.js…but yeah, unless you know you need React for very specific reasons, it's definitely overkill. =)
  - Xavdidtheshadow 5y ago
    Next.js is cool, but afaik takes a server, right? Gatsby is nice because you get React for component re-use + styling, but it builds into regular HTML+JS files and can live on (abundant, free) static site hosts.
    - leerob 5y ago
      It's primarily used with a server, correct. However, you can use `next export` which will generate only static assets (like HTML, JS, and CSS). Certain features aren't available that require a server (like i18n routing) but you can still do a lot!
schwartzworld 5y ago
I use Pandoc and a few lines of nodeJS code.
skrtskrt 5y ago
Hugo. I did find creating my own theme to be a bit of PITA due to the lack of documentation but once I got over that hump it's smooth sailing.
cyberge99 5y ago
I use hexo. It’s node and not super popular, but it does what I need and I’ve built my workflows around it so alost everything is done by cli (bash, imagemagick and hexo). It can be seen here: https://chrisbergeron.com https://chrisbergeron.com
fny 5y ago
Jekyll. It ain't broke, so why fix it?
marc_io 5y ago
Publii CMS for simple static blogs and sites in which clients will manage the content themselves.
cxr 5y ago
Instead of a traditional static site generator, put some content at /colophon that lists the transformations that need to be applied to produce the desired output, and then have a machine perform those steps.
- CRConrad 5y ago
  This "machine [that] perform[s] those steps" sounds exactly like it is a static site generator.
  - cxr 5y ago
    Yes, that is the intended meaning. This static site generator is non-traditional; it should live as first-class content on one of the pages of the site it outputs. This is not the way traditional static site generators work, although they should.
    - CRConrad 5y ago
      Sounds like a fucking weird place to keep it, so I don't think they should.
      - cxr 5y ago
        Not weird to suggest that an organization's website should serve as that organization's knowledge repository. Weird is the tradition of building out websites that are little more than Potemkin villages for the entity they represent. A Engelbart-style DKR <https://www.dougengelbart.org/content/view/190/ https://www.dougengelbart.org/content/view/190/> is certainly not bizarre as willingly participating in the inconvenience of relying on out-of-band documentation like a README that exists only in the source repository that lives on, say, GitHub, and a set of scripts/binaries that you have to download/install/configure separately and whose esoteric conventions you will have forgotten by the next time you try to update the site a year and a half later <https://corytheboyd.com/posts/2020-03-09 https://corytheboyd.com/posts/2020-03-09>—or worse, you find those tools no longer work, even though you do remember how to use them.
cutler 5y ago
Template::Toolkit (Perl) and Middleman (Ruby).
schemescape 5y ago
I was just researching static site generators and the ones that piqued my interest were: * Hugo * Eleventy * Zola Note that I excluded ones that output SPAs since I just want plain old hand-written HTML. Jekyll’s biggest hurdle for me was installing a Ruby environment.
- schemescape 5y ago
  I should have added that static site generators are ranked by popularity (i.e. stars) here: https://jamstack.org/generators/ https://jamstack.org/generators/
approxim8ion 5y ago
I wrote my own static generator in Python using Jinja2. It's very minimal but it works well enough for me. It may not scale well when there are hundreds/thousands of files but it will take a long time for me to hit that.
beardyw 5y ago
I built a blog with metalsmith years ago. I decided to resurrect it recently and, though I tried, I could not find anything to beat its simplicity. A JSON file provides the flow, plugins do the work. Only thing against is that the plugins encourage developers to create multiple and largely undesirable node dependencies.
drran 5y ago
I switched from jekyll to elder.js.

What do people use besides Jekyll?

by Exuma 5y ago

What do people use besides Jekyll?

https://www.11ty.dev/ https://www.11ty.dev/ I'm doing a non trivial project with eleventy in my free time -- works well.

bilal4hmed 5y ago

Ive been using Hugo

cproctor 5y ago

I've been using Hugo as well. I used Pelican (Python port of Jekyll) for a long time, but Hugo is so much more performant and has a larger ecosystem at this point. The main downside is that the Hugo documentation is sometimes terse and snarky.

firecall 5y ago
With regards to performance, I used Hugo like 3 or 4 years ago now, and it was insanely fast! Compared to really sluggish build times with Jekyll/Ruby it was incredible! Some sites went from 10s of seconds to what felt like instant build! However, with new versions of Ruby and M1 Macs, I dont notice build lag in Jekyll anymore! And overall, I much preferred Jekyll and the way it structured sites, template and includes! :-)
shusaku 5y ago
I switched my blog from Jekyll to Pelican recently after getting sick of constant ruby package versioning issues. It’s pretty nice, though maybe not as good for getting your site to appear on google search

Xavdidtheshadow 5y ago

My work has moved largely from Ruby to JS, so I've been enjoying Gatsby! It's probably overkill for simple sites, but I like how customizable it is.

jaredcwhite 5y ago
For React-based projects, I would advocate for Next.js…but yeah, unless you know you need React for very specific reasons, it's definitely overkill. =)
- Xavdidtheshadow 5y ago
  Next.js is cool, but afaik takes a server, right? Gatsby is nice because you get React for component re-use + styling, but it builds into regular HTML+JS files and can live on (abundant, free) static site hosts.
  - leerob 5y ago
    It's primarily used with a server, correct. However, you can use `next export` which will generate only static assets (like HTML, JS, and CSS). Certain features aren't available that require a server (like i18n routing) but you can still do a lot!

schwartzworld 5y ago

I use Pandoc and a few lines of nodeJS code.

skrtskrt 5y ago

Hugo. I did find creating my own theme to be a bit of PITA due to the lack of documentation but once I got over that hump it's smooth sailing.

cyberge99 5y ago

I use hexo. It’s node and not super popular, but it does what I need and I’ve built my workflows around it so alost everything is done by cli (bash, imagemagick and hexo). It can be seen here: https://chrisbergeron.com https://chrisbergeron.com

fny 5y ago

Jekyll. It ain't broke, so why fix it?

marc_io 5y ago

Publii CMS for simple static blogs and sites in which clients will manage the content themselves.

cxr 5y ago

Instead of a traditional static site generator, put some content at /colophon that lists the transformations that need to be applied to produce the desired output, and then have a machine perform those steps.

CRConrad 5y ago
This "machine [that] perform[s] those steps" sounds exactly like it is a static site generator.
- cxr 5y ago
  Yes, that is the intended meaning. This static site generator is non-traditional; it should live as first-class content on one of the pages of the site it outputs. This is not the way traditional static site generators work, although they should.
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    Sounds like a fucking weird place to keep it, so I don't think they should.
    - cxr 5y ago
      Not weird to suggest that an organization's website should serve as that organization's knowledge repository. Weird is the tradition of building out websites that are little more than Potemkin villages for the entity they represent. A Engelbart-style DKR <https://www.dougengelbart.org/content/view/190/ https://www.dougengelbart.org/content/view/190/> is certainly not bizarre as willingly participating in the inconvenience of relying on out-of-band documentation like a README that exists only in the source repository that lives on, say, GitHub, and a set of scripts/binaries that you have to download/install/configure separately and whose esoteric conventions you will have forgotten by the next time you try to update the site a year and a half later <https://corytheboyd.com/posts/2020-03-09 https://corytheboyd.com/posts/2020-03-09>—or worse, you find those tools no longer work, even though you do remember how to use them.

cutler 5y ago

Template::Toolkit (Perl) and Middleman (Ruby).

schemescape 5y ago

I was just researching static site generators and the ones that piqued my interest were: * Hugo * Eleventy * Zola Note that I excluded ones that output SPAs since I just want plain old hand-written HTML. Jekyll’s biggest hurdle for me was installing a Ruby environment.

schemescape 5y ago
I should have added that static site generators are ranked by popularity (i.e. stars) here: https://jamstack.org/generators/ https://jamstack.org/generators/

approxim8ion 5y ago

I wrote my own static generator in Python using Jinja2. It's very minimal but it works well enough for me. It may not scale well when there are hundreds/thousands of files but it will take a long time for me to hit that.

beardyw 5y ago

I built a blog with metalsmith years ago. I decided to resurrect it recently and, though I tried, I could not find anything to beat its simplicity. A JSON file provides the flow, plugins do the work. Only thing against is that the plugins encourage developers to create multiple and largely undesirable node dependencies.

drran 5y ago

I switched from jekyll to elder.js.