New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Publii looks very solid! Thanks!
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.
I recently started using AWS Amplify. Git push to deploy.
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.
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.
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.
How: Part of site is Grav and other part is done in hugo.
Why: We needed php in some parts so we use grav.
Have used Jekyll a bit; went insane and built my own Luapress after that.
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.
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.