3 ms·

At this point I’d just go with a flat file CMS, there are so many good systems nowadays https://github.com/ahadb/flat-file-cms https://github.com/ahadb/flat-fil

At this point I’d just go with a flat file CMS, there are so many good systems nowadays https://github.com/ahadb/flat-file-cms https://github.com/ahadb/flat-file-cms

yamtaddle 4y ago
If you're just hosting a blog or simple informational site, there are better options, for sure. ... except that you can just go click a couple buttons, and be ready to start editing your first blog post, right in your browser, with Wordpress, because there are a bunch of easy-to-use hosting solutions. If you're doing much more than that with your site, it can be hard to sell a solution other than Wordpress. The plugin ecosystem and 3rd-party service support is pretty damn good. Consider how few other web platform ecosystems exist that can support individuals and even small teams selling commercial plugins—like, full-time, that's your day job. I think WP's a fucking mess and hate developing for it, but it's hard to advocate for anything else, for a pretty large set of Web use cases.
- johnchristopher 4y ago
  I usually half joke (who can tell ! I can't !) that nobody got fired for buying IBM, Microsoft or Wordpress when asked why we use wordpress @work.
CharlesW 4y ago
For me, SQLite support makes it less likely that I'd switch to a flat-file site generator over WordPress.
- tyingq 4y ago
  The database code, though, ends up being a crazy mishmash of Wordpress' existing faked-up/string-escaping wpdb_prepare() then auto-translated from mysql syntax to SQLite. I'm sure they will test it pretty well, but it's a bizarre setup.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
tasuki 4y ago
Why a flat file CMS rather than a static generator? The page you linked explicitly says "We’re not talking about static site generators here", but doesn't elaborate why, and even includes a bunch of static site generators, eg Jekyll. I'm confused.

3 ms·

At this point I’d just go with a flat file CMS, there are so many good systems nowadays https://github.com/ahadb/flat-file-cms https://github.com/ahadb/flat-fil

by haunter 4y ago

At this point I’d just go with a flat file CMS, there are so many good systems nowadays https://github.com/ahadb/flat-file-cms https://github.com/ahadb/flat-file-cms

yamtaddle 4y ago
If you're just hosting a blog or simple informational site, there are better options, for sure. ... except that you can just go click a couple buttons, and be ready to start editing your first blog post, right in your browser, with Wordpress, because there are a bunch of easy-to-use hosting solutions. If you're doing much more than that with your site, it can be hard to sell a solution other than Wordpress. The plugin ecosystem and 3rd-party service support is pretty damn good. Consider how few other web platform ecosystems exist that can support individuals and even small teams selling commercial plugins—like, full-time, that's your day job. I think WP's a fucking mess and hate developing for it, but it's hard to advocate for anything else, for a pretty large set of Web use cases.
- johnchristopher 4y ago
  I usually half joke (who can tell ! I can't !) that nobody got fired for buying IBM, Microsoft or Wordpress when asked why we use wordpress @work.
CharlesW 4y ago
For me, SQLite support makes it less likely that I'd switch to a flat-file site generator over WordPress.
- tyingq 4y ago
  The database code, though, ends up being a crazy mishmash of Wordpress' existing faked-up/string-escaping wpdb_prepare() then auto-translated from mysql syntax to SQLite. I'm sure they will test it pretty well, but it's a bizarre setup.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
tasuki 4y ago
Why a flat file CMS rather than a static generator? The page you linked explicitly says "We’re not talking about static site generators here", but doesn't elaborate why, and even includes a bunch of static site generators, eg Jekyll. I'm confused.