Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Advertise on LowEndTalk.com

Static Website
New on LowEndTalk? Please read our 'Community Rules' by clicking on it in the right menu!

Static Website

SplitIceSplitIce Member, Provider
edited August 2019 in General

Opinion time -
What static website software (i.e the Ghost) do you use?
Whats your experience publishing content in this way (pain points? why do you do it this way?)?

Your opinion is valuable and will be exploited for $7 worth of gain.

X4B - DDoS Protection: Affordable Anycast DDoS mitigation with PoPs in the Europe, Asia, North and South America.
Latest Offer: Brazil Launch 2020 Offer

Comments

  • I use Jekyll

    It's pretty much fire and forget, only needing to run a script to regenerate the page occasionally. I don't have to keep CMS software updated against vulnerabilities.

    Thanked by 1vyas11

    Will shill for carrots.

  • Hugo

    Thanked by 1ErawanArifNugroho
  • BlaZeBlaZe Member, Provider

    Honestly, for static websites I've been doing it the old fashioned way of simply having certain HTML files coded manually.

    I did try Jekyll and its amazing but for a 5 page website I thought to go the manual way of 5 html files.

    ExoticVM.com - Find VPS in exotic locations! - Discussion Thread

  • Mobirise

    signature for rent - ^_^

  • org-mode.org

    #lexit spread the word.

  • carrd.co or HTML5UP and Pixelarity are all pretty great for single-paged static websites (iirc all 3 are run by the same guy)

    Thanked by 1DreamCaster
  • In truth I'd like to figure out how to extract the style sheet for Firefox reader-mode, so I can make all my pages look like they are already in that mode. Anyone know how to do that? Earlier I wanted to make them all look like Firefox's RSS rendering, but they disabled that.

    #lexit spread the word.

  • @willie said:
    In truth I'd like to figure out how to extract the style sheet for Firefox reader-mode, so I can make all my pages look like they are already in that mode. Anyone know how to do that? Earlier I wanted to make them all look like Firefox's RSS rendering, but they disabled that.

    https://github.com/mozilla/readability

    This might be a good start :)

    Thanked by 3willie uptime vyas11
  • Thanks, but that is a JS library that de-crapifies the DOM of an existing page. I'm looking to simulate the visual style of how Firerox presents the pages after de-crapification. I don't have to de-crapify my pages since I write them without crap to begin with ;).

    Thanked by 2sanvit bugrakoc

    #lexit spread the word.

  • manlivomanlivo Member without signature

    +1 Jekyll

  • @sanvit said:
    carrd.co or HTML5UP and Pixelarity are all pretty great for single-paged static websites (iirc all 3 are run by the same guy)

    Love carrd.co. Renewing for another year on BF is an annual ritual now. Ten website plan, three in use ... seven idling

    Thanked by 1sanvit
  • @vyas11 said:

    @sanvit said:
    carrd.co or HTML5UP and Pixelarity are all pretty great for single-paged static websites (iirc all 3 are run by the same guy)

    Love carrd.co. Renewing for another year on BF is an annual ritual now. Ten website plan, three in use ... seven idling

    Support is awesome too. Last time I did a feature request, it took like a week for the new feature go live :)

    Thanked by 3vyas11 uptime maverickp
  • intovpsintovps Member, Provider

    We're using Jekyll for our websites.

    Thanked by 1vimalware
  • Jekyll & Coda 2

  • Geany cross platform IDE.

    Catch me over at Primary DNS. If you want to chat I am done with this cesspool.

  • rcxbrcxb Member

    @willie said:
    In truth I'd like to figure out how to extract the style sheet for Firefox reader-mode, so I can make all my pages look like they are already in that mode. Anyone know how to do that?

    Visit a site. Select reader mode. Hit F12. Click on Style Editor. Mouse-over aboutReader.css and narrate.css and click the SAVE link that appears by each.

  • Blogging : publii
    Landing page / simple web : bootstrap studio / mobirise

    Thanked by 1caracal
  • jsgjsg Member

    Either a compiler/transformer (like e.g. markdown -> Html) or an editor with Html support. Where possible I prefer the former approach because I strongly dislike XML.

    Thanks no.

  • FHRFHR Member, Provider

    Out of the common static site generators, I haven't found a single one which I liked. Either they're too complex (made for blogs), or written in languages I don't like.

    So I have a custom page generator - it's just 30 lines of Python that apply Jinja2 templating to all *.tmpl files in a folder and exports them as .html to a second folder.

    Thanked by 1uptime

    SkylonHost - affordable hourly-billed KVM VPS in Prague, CZ!
    Featuring own high performance network AS202297 | RIPE NCC member | Contact us for IPs/ASNs

  • LeeLee Member

    I prefer Hugo over Jekyll, especially for sites with lots of pages as Hugo is faster, but I also like getkirby as I know PHP and it's really nice overall but costly.

  • SplitIceSplitIce Member, Provider

    How are people publishing. Generate and SFTP/FTP (e.g Filezilla)?

    X4B - DDoS Protection: Affordable Anycast DDoS mitigation with PoPs in the Europe, Asia, North and South America.
    Latest Offer: Brazil Launch 2020 Offer
  • what about github pages https://pages.github.com/ ?

    * Centmin Mod Project (HTTP/2 support + ngx_pagespeed + Nginx Lua + Vhost Stats)
    * Centmin Mod LEMP Stack Quick Install Guide
  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Moderator

    Lee said: I prefer Hugo over Jekyll, especially for sites with lots of pages as Hugo is faster, but I also like getkirby as I know PHP and it's really nice overall but costly.

    I've used Hugo, too - very nice and super fast. Jekyll is OK, but I'm not a ruby person.

    I've also used Pelican, which is python.

    FHR said: So I have a custom page generator - it's just 30 lines of Python that apply Jinja2 templating to all *.tmpl files in a folder and exports them as .html to a second folder.

    Right...the main things with SSGs is some kind of templating + Markdown conversion.

    Lee said: I also like getkirby as I know PHP and it's really nice overall but costly.

    Holy guacamole mostaccioli. I bought a Kirby 2 personal license in 2015 for $17. Kirby 3 is $109?!? Even the upgrade from v2 is 79EUR.

    image

    Thanked by 1vimalware

    For LET support, please visit the support desk.

  • Hugo is pretty good. I really like Gatsby but it's very complex and would be quite hard to deal with if you have no experience with React and GraphQL.

    eva2000 said: what about github pages https://pages.github.com/ ?

    Pretty limited... The only static site generator they support is Jekyll. To use any others, you need to commit the generated HTML files to source control, which is messy. Netlify is a much better hosting service as you can customize the build process, so any SSG can be used.

    Thanked by 1uptime
  • LeeLee Member
    edited August 2019

    raindog308 said: Holy guacamole mostaccioli. I bought a Kirby 2 personal license in 2015 for $17. Kirby 3 is $109?!? Even the upgrade from v2 is 79EUR.

    Indeed, the jump to Kirby 3 was a steep one, having said that, it is good. I use it for a site that has a blog, large guides section (800 pages) and a few others bits. Blazing fast, easy to work with (if you know PHP) and all the tools you need to build whatever you want are baked in, just not shoved in your face like say, Grav.

    For what it offers I don't mind paying the price, for one site, not more.

  • Hugo
    Gatsby
    WP + Hugo
    WP + Gatsby
    Grav + Hugo

  • vyas11vyas11 Member
    edited August 2019

    Datenstrom Yellow. Have a new project I am working on. Markdown + php mostly. Quite nifty. Planning a mini wiki site for a storytelling podcast for kids, with > 400 pages.

    Thanked by 1uptime
  • @cazrz said:
    Hugo
    Gatsby
    WP + Hugo
    WP + Gatsby
    Grav + Hugo

    I'm curious what you mean by Grav + Hugo.

    Thanked by 1vimalware
  • @hardgamers said:
    Blogging : publii
    Landing page / simple web : bootstrap studio / mobirise

    Publii looks very solid! Thanks!

  • @vyas11 said:
    Datenstrom Yellow. Have a new project I am working on. Markdown + php mostly. Quite nifty. Planning a mini wiki site for a storytelling podcast for kids, with > 400 pages.

    I took a look at Yellow a couple of years ago and it seemed very basic, but I see that it's been continuously developed since then.

    Thanked by 1vyas11

    "Linux will run happily with only 4 MB of RAM, including all of the bells and whistles such as the X Window System, Emacs, and so on." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 32)

  • FHRFHR Member, Provider

    @SplitIce said:
    How are people publishing. Generate and SFTP/FTP (e.g Filezilla)?

    I recently started using AWS Amplify. Git push to deploy.

    Thanked by 1Unixfy

    SkylonHost - affordable hourly-billed KVM VPS in Prague, CZ!
    Featuring own high performance network AS202297 | RIPE NCC member | Contact us for IPs/ASNs

  • @depricated said:

    @cazrz said:
    Hugo
    Gatsby
    WP + Hugo
    WP + Gatsby
    Grav + Hugo

    I'm curious what you mean by Grav + Hugo.

    Grav cms and hugo using learn theme.

  • cazrz said: Grav cms and hugo using learn theme.

    I mean how and why do you combine Grav and Hugo?

  • If it's about performance, pretty sure WordPress with cache plugin will perform the same as static sites. Because that the plugin exactly do. It generates static html file.

  • jsgjsg Member

    @yokowasis said:
    If it's about performance, pretty sure WordPress with cache plugin will perform the same as static sites. Because that the plugin exactly do. It generates static html file.

    No. No matter what and how much funny caching Wordpress will not perform "the same", not even close.

    And no again, usually it's not about performance, at least not about performance alone. Another very important factor is not needing any scripting engine/interpreter, and related to that, security is another factor. Yet another factor is that static sites are easily human editable.

    Thanks no.

  • @jsg said:

    @yokowasis said:
    If it's about performance, pretty sure WordPress with cache plugin will perform the same as static sites. Because that the plugin exactly do. It generates static html file.

    No. No matter what and how much funny caching Wordpress will not perform "the same", not even close.

    And no again, usually it's not about performance, at least not about performance alone. Another very important factor is not needing any scripting engine/interpreter, and related to that, security is another factor. Yet another factor is that static sites are easily human editable.

    How is html generated by WordPress differ from html generated from let's say Hugo?

    WordPress also has static content generator plugin. It does exactly what others do. Generating static file. In term of performance I don't see why it will be different. And pretty sure WordPress makes sites easily editable, much more than static html sites, because that's its purpose (or any other cms for that matter). There is no way editing static html is easier than cms, no matter what kind of fancy editor you use.

    Thanked by 1kkrajk
  • jsgjsg Member
    edited August 2019

    @yokowasis said:
    If it's about performance, pretty sure WordPress with cache plugin will perform the same as static sites. Because that the plugin exactly do. It generates static html file.

    That was what I responded to. Your answer to my post is based on an arbitrary definition of "static" and considers the output of Wordpress "static html" - but it is not.
    Static html is in a file, the Html created by Wordpress however is created dynamically.

    The fact that there is also a static content generator plugin for Wordpress does not change the fact that Wordpress is usually and largely used as a dynamic engine.

    Thanks no.

  • @depricated said:

    cazrz said: Grav cms and hugo using learn theme.

    I mean how and why do you combine Grav and Hugo?

    How: Part of site is Grav and other part is done in hugo.
    Why: We needed php in some parts so we use grav.

    Thanked by 1vimalware
  • Have used Jekyll a bit; went insane and built my own Luapress after that.

    Thanked by 2uptime angstrom

    Afterburst - awesome & unmetered! Read why here!

  • @cazrz said:
    How: Part of site is Grav and other part is done in hugo.
    Why: We needed php in some parts so we use grav.

    If you needed php, why not stick with Grav for the whole thing? What does Hugo offer in that scenario that Grav doesn't have? If you want parts static, I believe Grav has static generator plugins.

    I'm curious because I've considered both Grav and Hugo, and both seem really nice, depending on the needs of the project.

  • @depricated said:

    @cazrz said:
    How: Part of site is Grav and other part is done in hugo.
    Why: We needed php in some parts so we use grav.

    If you needed php, why not stick with Grav for the whole thing? What does Hugo offer in that scenario that Grav doesn't have? If you want parts static, I believe Grav has static generator plugins.

    I'm curious because I've considered both Grav and Hugo, and both seem really nice, depending on the needs of the project.

    We originally developed the site using Grav. Using it for just simple static website. It grew big to hundreds of pages, so we decided to port to just make it html (using hugo and algolia) to lessen the resource usage and maintenance of PHP and other dependencies. Load the html files to CDN and just maintain the parts that needed PHP. There were 3 parts of the site. The two sections are huge static files, and each of the two section are handled by different staffs/editors. We don't want them touching the Grav part.

    Thanked by 2depricated vyas11
  • TiddlyWiki is an in-browser wiki engine written in JavaScript which runs entirely in your browser and does not require a server. It has plugin system, there are a lot of saver plugins which allows saving wiki data using only your browser, without re-uploading TiddlyWiki file manually.

    If you're not familiar with TiddlyWiki, read interactive introduction to TiddlyWiki or check out the presentation. Also visit its homepage for more information.

Sign In or Register to comment.