5 ms·
Maybe. I've been using a host of static site generators for about a year now, and for the less serious blog they seem to get in the way. I'd prefer to have eve
by dkuntz2 13y ago
Maybe.
I've been using a host of static site generators for about a year now, and for the less serious blog they seem to get in the way. I'd prefer to have everything online, accessible from any computer with an internet connection. Posting quick, little thoughts is not something Jekyll or other static site generators do well.
For the more serious blog, which has infrequent and longer posts, I really like the static site generator, because it lets me keep everything together and easily deal with it locally.
- hellweaver666 13y agoThis weekend I've been playing with Kirby. It's a static site generator powered by PHP that runs on Markdown powered text files but it also has an optional control panel for editing posts if you need that.
- dkuntz2 13y agoI looked at Kirby. My problem is I don't really want to pay for it. Were I to pay, I'd probably go with Statamic, which is similar to Kirby, but looks nicer. Mostly I don't want to pay because I like the idea of open source, and having the ability to submit a fix if I find a bug appeals to me. And partially because I'm cheap.