Live data from Hacker News

Building a fast, secured and free static site in less than three hours

fillmem.com

141–150 of 201 posts

Re: Building a fast, secured and free static site in less than three hours

#141

I really don't understand why we are seeing Yet Another Tutorial for Yet Another SSG on the front page of HN.

Coding to SSGs are fashionable at the moment, yet somehow writing your own HTML isn't...

Writing HTML is what my grandfather did. I am a ninja rockstar growth hacker and use 8 different tools to make it easier.

Re: Building a fast, secured and free static site in less than three hours

#143

I also used Hugo for my site - https://testloop.co.uk It's so simple.. and FAST. It's hosted on AWS S3 with CloudFront & Route53 so it's not free, but at a cost of around $1.20 per month, it's not far off.

$1.20 a month is really expensive. I have a whole virtual server for €5 a month (and there are smaller ones) that hosts 10+ sites/apps. EDIT: I just realized that's a question I should ask: Does your price include the domain?

It didn't include the domain no.

I've used digital ocean droplets for some things for a similar $5 a month price, but it hardly seems necessary for a static site. It's much less faffery to just upload some files to S3 and click some buttons in the AWS console to configure everything.

Re: Building a fast, secured and free static site in less than three hours

#144

After many different iterations, I'm now using netlify (with middleman). Really hard to beat. GitHub pages are amazingly fast and a pretty good default choice. With cloudflare it's a pretty solid combo. But netlify's awareness/integration between the content and the cdn is really compelling. Imagine they'll be able to do a lot more with it down the line too.

I've been developing front-end apps for so long I was out of the loop when a friend asked me, "How can I upload a website folder to a domain".

Turns out, the easiest path is Netlify. It provides you with a CDN and storage for free, and has a nice drag-and-drop deploy interface for basic static sites.

Re: Building a fast, secured and free static site in less than three hours

#145

I really don't understand why we are seeing Yet Another Tutorial for Yet Another SSG on the front page of HN.

Coding to SSGs are fashionable at the moment, yet somehow writing your own HTML isn't...

Writing the template and the content in HTML is easy enough for me, but I'm still struggling to make post lists, feeds and other things out of it without a lot of administrative effort.

Re: Building a fast, secured and free static site in less than three hours

#146
post #64
post #54

Holy cow. Is this an improvement? Remember in 1999 when you could get a static website up in 3 minutes using ftp?

And you could do it with a WYSIWYG editor which would output reasonable markup. (dreamweaver) Or more popular, you could do it with a horrible WYSWIG editor which output garbage (Frontpage express).

I would beg to upgrade to Frontpage express over the current domain-specific WYSIWYG I'm using day to day right now.

Beg

Re: Building a fast, secured and free static site in less than three hours

#147
post #54

Holy cow. Is this an improvement? Remember in 1999 when you could get a static website up in 3 minutes using ftp?

That's how we do it in 2017. Want to handle an on-click? You need dozens of NPM modules and webpack. Look at Docker's cowsay "hello world" example - it has to satisfy several (dozens?) of perl dependencies just to render ASCII art.

Re: Building a fast, secured and free static site in less than three hours

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coding to SSGs are fashionable at the moment, yet somehow writing your own HTML isn't...

Writing the template and the content in HTML is easy enough for me, but I'm still struggling to make post lists, feeds and other things out of it without a lot of administrative effort.

But then it isn't really a static site...

... and I get it, one of our webdevs spits out static sites from some PHP code he wrote that builds them. As the guy that has to administer that crap I much prefer to hoist static HTML... but like so many things in the SV tech scene, these stupid "engineers" have to build a thousand different little frameworks with a thousand new buzzwords for a thousand unoriginal, rehashed ideas. Many of them forsaking old techniques that worked well, and in many cases better the cheesy little framework some fresh-off-the-boat bootcamp-grad "envisioned" because he didn't want to learn $UNFASHIONABLELANGUAGEORTECHNIQUE

Post reply on HN