3 ms·

The major problem with all static generators is that, by design, they can't host comments. And using a 3rd party source for comments ain't exactly what I'd be l

by zobzu 14y ago

The major problem with all static generators is that, by design, they can't host comments. And using a 3rd party source for comments ain't exactly what I'd be looking for (self-contained) The minor problem is that all the ones I used so far are a lot more complex to use that dynamic generators, for some reason. (Even thus I write templates, css, etc for the dynamic ones as well). It seems like a "it has to be complex" syndrome :p

jwandborg 14y ago
> The major problem with all static generators is that, by design, they can't host comments. And using a 3rd party source for comments ain't exactly what I'd be looking for (self-contained) I have initiated work on talkatv (http://talka.tv http://talka.tv). It's written in Python using Flask. You might find it useful and I hope you'll be able to help me expand it, since I havent found much time to do so myself.
- zobzu 14y ago
  That's interesting, and would gain from being more well known :) I hope to have time to give it a try as well. Thanks!
- sdoering 14y ago
  That's interesting. I once (some time ago) tried juvia (https://github.com/phusion/juvia https://github.com/phusion/juvia), as comments are a problem for me, 'cause I try to be as much self-contained, as I can be. But on my host, it was not that easy to setup, and I am not that much of a rails guy. So a python-based alternative might fit me better. I'll have a look.
DanBC 14y ago
> The major problem with all static generators is that, by design, they can't host comments. Very few sites are enhanced by allowing people to leave comments. I don't go to YouTube for the comments. I agree at the sub-optimality of third party comment hosting. Maybe a solution is to encourage better discussion on aggregators, and better aggregators?
waxjar 14y ago
As a visitor, I despise self-hosted comment sections. I rarely feel the need to comment, but when I do, I don't want to give you my e-mail address (what the hell are you gonna do with it, anyway?), wait until it's approved by the author or constantly go check your website if someone replied to my comment.
- zobzu 14y ago
  Self hosted comments don't have to ask for your email, and, they can use whichever authentication system you like, so you could log with FB, Google, Persona, you name it. They have open authentication protocols. The only difference is that host controls &store the comments, and the host isn't disqus or what not, but the guy owning the blog instead. But psst... following that logic you must hate hackernews commenting system :p
  - waxjar 14y ago
    I know that, of course. The reality is that many people just use whatever their blogging engine ships, which often involves asking for an e-mail address and waiting until your comment has been (manually) approved by the author. The Hacker News commenting system doesn't bother me as much, because I only need to sign up once. For self-hosted comment sections I have to either "sign up" for every individual blog I want to comment on or tie my real identity to my comments for convenience. That's something I'd rather not do and which isn't necessary at all. On top of that, Hacker News provides a nice "threads" page where I can track who replied to my comment. With a self-hosted comment section I'd have to check the comments section of several blogs constantly or subscribe to some kind of comment RSS feed, which is not ideal at all. Hacker news can be substituted for "A service like Disqus" in the last two paragraphs. For these reasons, I might decide to not reply at all, even though I might have something relevant and interesting to say. I'd like to hear your reasons for hosting comments yourself though, as I can't think of any good ones myself that render the arguments I laid out here irrelevant.

by zobzu 14y ago

jwandborg 14y ago

> The major problem with all static generators is that, by design, they can't host comments. And using a 3rd party source for comments ain't exactly what I'd be looking for (self-contained) I have initiated work on talkatv (http://talka.tv http://talka.tv). It's written in Python using Flask. You might find it useful and I hope you'll be able to help me expand it, since I havent found much time to do so myself.

zobzu 14y ago
That's interesting, and would gain from being more well known :) I hope to have time to give it a try as well. Thanks!
sdoering 14y ago
That's interesting. I once (some time ago) tried juvia (https://github.com/phusion/juvia https://github.com/phusion/juvia), as comments are a problem for me, 'cause I try to be as much self-contained, as I can be. But on my host, it was not that easy to setup, and I am not that much of a rails guy. So a python-based alternative might fit me better. I'll have a look.

DanBC 14y ago

> The major problem with all static generators is that, by design, they can't host comments. Very few sites are enhanced by allowing people to leave comments. I don't go to YouTube for the comments. I agree at the sub-optimality of third party comment hosting. Maybe a solution is to encourage better discussion on aggregators, and better aggregators?

waxjar 14y ago

As a visitor, I despise self-hosted comment sections. I rarely feel the need to comment, but when I do, I don't want to give you my e-mail address (what the hell are you gonna do with it, anyway?), wait until it's approved by the author or constantly go check your website if someone replied to my comment.

zobzu 14y ago
Self hosted comments don't have to ask for your email, and, they can use whichever authentication system you like, so you could log with FB, Google, Persona, you name it. They have open authentication protocols. The only difference is that host controls &store the comments, and the host isn't disqus or what not, but the guy owning the blog instead. But psst... following that logic you must hate hackernews commenting system :p
- waxjar 14y ago
  I know that, of course. The reality is that many people just use whatever their blogging engine ships, which often involves asking for an e-mail address and waiting until your comment has been (manually) approved by the author. The Hacker News commenting system doesn't bother me as much, because I only need to sign up once. For self-hosted comment sections I have to either "sign up" for every individual blog I want to comment on or tie my real identity to my comments for convenience. That's something I'd rather not do and which isn't necessary at all. On top of that, Hacker News provides a nice "threads" page where I can track who replied to my comment. With a self-hosted comment section I'd have to check the comments section of several blogs constantly or subscribe to some kind of comment RSS feed, which is not ideal at all. Hacker news can be substituted for "A service like Disqus" in the last two paragraphs. For these reasons, I might decide to not reply at all, even though I might have something relevant and interesting to say. I'd like to hear your reasons for hosting comments yourself though, as I can't think of any good ones myself that render the arguments I laid out here irrelevant.