3 ms·
Over the last few years, I've found that most sites clients want can be built with static site generators and JavaScript. PHP is also great and easily hosted! B
by GavinAnderegg 1y ago
Over the last few years, I've found that most sites clients want can be built with static site generators and JavaScript. PHP is also great and easily hosted! But most times when there's a sprinkling of dynamism needed, it's OK if its happens at build/run time rather than when the page is rendered on a seever. This leads to faster page load and less to worry about security-wise. No shade! I've just been finding this has lead to good outcomes for me.
- scotty79 1y agoYour static site generator can generate PHP instead of html and have some server-side dynamism sprinkled in your mostly static site, same way that generating JS can sprinkle some client side dynamism.
- LamaOfRuin 1y agoThis is not the definition of a static site.
- scotty79 1y agoDefinitions are blurred. PHP file can be almost HTML file.
- johntash 1y agoNo clue how relevant they are today, but server side includes (SSI) solves the problem of wanting a _mostly_ static page with a little bit of dynamic content in it.
- miladyincontrol 1y agoYou mean to say some basic company site, blog or photo gallery that only gets updated once/twice a month, with zero dynamic content otherwise doesnt need a whole LAMP stack? Honestly though with GH/CF pages type hosting and how simple static sites can be its a direction I'm ever thankful things have been moving. Just seems so much less painful for those who arent here to be security experts and just want a bloody site that 'just works'