I've personally been meaning to rebuild my personal site with Next.js: https://github.com/zeit/next.js/
Used it to build a few static sites at work and have quite enjoyed it as you get to use React.
Ask HN: What's a good static site generator to use for a blog in 2018?
41–50 of 129 posts
Re: Ask HN: What's a good static site generator to use for a blog in 2018?
#42Previous discussion about almost exactly the same topic from 17 days ago:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16346187 (89 comments)
Re: Ask HN: What's a good static site generator to use for a blog in 2018?
#43I'm using Hakyll, simply because I want a bit more exposure to Haskell. I've used Jekyll and Hugo in the past. Jekyll has lots of support but is slow for large sites. Hugo was alright. Only used it for a small project.
Here is a tutorial on creating a static site with Hakyll and Github:
https://begriffs.com/posts/2014-08-12-create-static-site-wit...
EDIT:
Tutorials about Hakyll: https://jaspervdj.be/hakyll/tutorials.html
Re: Ask HN: What's a good static site generator to use for a blog in 2018?
#44IMO, just about any will do, but the simplest thing that'll get the job done is probably the best choice - less inertia.
If all you need is a markdown-powered blog, then choose something that does only that. I use Gatsby because I'm familiar with React and it does what I need it to do.
I provide a few small businesses with simple websites to advertise their services (opening times and the like) where wordpress would have been the "traditional" choice, and the main thing I've learned from this is to stay away from loads of plugins or extra functionality until you absolutely need it - it's just more maintenance overhead and things to mess about with/configure. When I update a client site, I simply edit some text and regenerate the site - no plugins to update or config files to edit.
Re: Ask HN: What's a good static site generator to use for a blog in 2018?
#45In my experience, static site generators are not a complete solution. Unless you are satisfied with the default look and feel of generated pages (or a theme available), even Jekyll needs some tinkering, debugging and diving into the code.
So, in case you need customizaton: just stick with any static site generator written in a familiar language and don't be afraid to fiddle with generation process.
Re: Ask HN: What's a good static site generator to use for a blog in 2018?
#46I use Hugo too for https://apporchestra.com I have it in a GitLab repository with the continuous integration script configured to build and deploy it to Google app engine (configured as a static content so no paid instances are running) each time I push a commit.
Re: Ask HN: What's a good static site generator to use for a blog in 2018?
#47* Makefile
* Pandoc
* git
You push to a remote on your server, it runs the Makefile via post-receive hook and builds a single, static html file from your Markdown with Pandoc (inlineing everything, images even fonts if you want to) and copies it to the folder served by your nginx.
Re: Ask HN: What's a good static site generator to use for a blog in 2018?
#48IMO, just about any will do, but the simplest thing that'll get the job done is probably the best choice - less inertia. If all you need is a markdown-powered blog, then choose something that does only that. I use Gatsby because I'm familiar with React and it does what I need it to do. I provide a few small businesses with simple websites to advertise their services (opening times and the like) where wordpress would…
[deleted]
Re: Ask HN: What's a good static site generator to use for a blog in 2018?
#49This is likely to be an unpopular answer, but the best choice is probably WordPress. I just used it to generate a network of about 40 static sites because (1) it has literally thousands of beautiful, professionally-developed themes for free; (2) same goes for plugins; (3) it's easy to hack if need be; and (4) it probably has one of the easiest-to-use and most-complete content editors, capable of creating both pages a…
I also recommend Wordpress with HardyPress. You can use Wordpress to create content more elegantly than with static plain files, and you can use HardyPress to make the result a fully static site.
I've been running my own blogs / portfolio in the last decade on static sites, from now now I'm using this new combo. Why? With the advent of the headless CMS scene static site generators just lost their unique advantage to spitting out HTML files. And meantime they didn't advance at all on the content creation side.
Creating, managing and distributing content with a CMS is far easier than with a static site generator. And when the final output is the same the choice is obvious.
Disclaimer: I'm not affiliated with HardyPress nor Wordpress, however I do create themes for Wordpress.
Notes: In my profile the first link is a statically generated site, as well as the others in the About section. The second link is a Wordpress+HardyPress combo and you can check it live the amazing speed it offers.
Re: Ask HN: What's a good static site generator to use for a blog in 2018?
#50IMO, just about any will do, but the simplest thing that'll get the job done is probably the best choice - less inertia. If all you need is a markdown-powered blog, then choose something that does only that. I use Gatsby because I'm familiar with React and it does what I need it to do. I provide a few small businesses with simple websites to advertise their services (opening times and the like) where wordpress would…
Reply to a deleted comment, mentioning that once the client wants to make edits themselves you end up back at wordpress:
Absolutely correct. Unfortunately, I wouldn't trust most of my clients with a wordpress login so that's never been an option. Coming from wordpress sites that clients have installed all manner of plugins on and I have to fix every two weeks, updating some text files manually is a minor issue. I will never go back to wordpress hell.
I am looking into online editing of the content files to address this issue, but I would rather stick with making the edits myself than see a client site with 5 H1s in a page.