6 comments

  • alwillis49 minutes ago
    Been on the Jekyll bandwagon for a long time now; it's my go-to static site generator.
  • mc00753 minutes ago
    interesting, we went from classic CMS to Jekyll, then Hugo, then Astro and finally built our own CMS - for larger sets of content and sites. Fiddling with custom DSLs, templates, weird builds and tricks ... was just way too time consuming - unthinkable my wife would ever touch it or write an article in there :)<p>Have a look at <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;service.polymech.info&#x2F;user&#x2F;cgo&#x2F;pages&#x2F;poolypress-cms" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;service.polymech.info&#x2F;user&#x2F;cgo&#x2F;pages&#x2F;poolypress-cms</a>, agentic CMS, translates, creates and manages articles with a few prompts, widget aware.
  • donohoe1 hour ago
    I don’t get it. Their setup is so much more complicated and limiting than what they had on Wordpress.<p>I won’t argue with their reasons to move (which don’t stack up for me either but agree to disagree).
  • pseudosavant1 hour ago
    I recently retired my Wordpress blog and replaced it with a static-site generator. My requirements were straight-forward and I ended up having Codex build it for me.<p>It was the last thing using MySQL, PHP, and Wordpress on my site. 3 big things to not have to keep up-to-date and secured. I can check in markdown to my repo, it builds the site, and Nginx serves it. So fast, and secure.
  • purplehat_1 hour ago
    what&#x27;s the advantage of a static site generator over pandoc + makefile?
    • lopsotronic49 minutes ago
      While opinions differ, I would say that pandoc+makefile is a variant of SSG, versus something wholly different in kind.
  • KaiShips1 hour ago
    [dead]