Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Offbase: Static site generator in a browser

offbase.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 96 posts

Re: Offbase: Static site generator in a browser

#81

Post by chrxr »

chrxr wrote: post #72

I recently moved my personal website ( https://chrxr.com ) to a static site in a rather complicated fashion. I use Wagtail as my CMS, so I dockerized it and put it on an ECS cluster. I then use Wagtail Bakery to publish the pages to S3. I then change the task count on the ECS service to 0. For a DB I use sqlite in EFS, so it's persistent and backed up. I was previously running on an EC2, and cut the cost from about $…

Looking back at this comment, I realize now that it's pretty pointless... just excited to play with stuff. Sorry folks! Enjoy your day.

Re: Offbase: Static site generator in a browser

#82

Post by cornell532 »

Just signup for Shifter (https://www.getshifter.io/) and call it a day.

The point of static hosting is to simplify things, not feed into developer fever dreams of complex systems.

Plus, Wordpress is established, mature ecosystem that can provide almost any mainstream feature you could imagine.

I went to them after losing a weekend trying to stand-up my company's website after some ill-advised changes to my Wordpress instance (bad plugins caused Wordpress server to crash).

I haven't looked back since. Wordpress-based static hosting Just Works + makes sense

ps HardyPress was a similar alternative I evaluated. It had an issue failing to render some of my webpages to static....but maybe it's become better

Re: Offbase: Static site generator in a browser

#83

Post by Uehreka »

anderspitman wrote: post #78

So much complexity to get an HTML page on the internet. IMO the future of data ownership is self hosting from devices like raspberry pi's and upcycled Android phones. What works now: * Tunnel proxies[0] like ngrok. You can get an HTML page on the internet in 2 minutes with ngrok. * Software like Caddy which simplifies certificate management. What's needed: * IPv6 and ISPs to drop NAT so we don't need proxies. Good lu…

If every link in the chain supports IPv6, can you connect directly to a computer behind a NAT by using IPv6? Or are IPv6 connections NATed too and we’re likely stuck with this for the foreseeable future?

Re: Offbase: Static site generator in a browser

#84

Post by proyb »

Shared404 wrote: post #65
proyb wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, sadly shared hosting still limit with capped disk IO and bandwidth at a premium price which would be similar or more than competitive VPS in performance. I'm still looking out for competitive VPS provider other than UpCloud if you have any recommendations.

I like Linode personally. No BSD options, but they've got a pretty good selection of Linux distros as ready made images.

I have Linode years ago and moved on when the pricing and performance weren't competitive as UpCloud.

Re: Offbase: Static site generator in a browser

#85

Post by proyb »

XCSme wrote: post #54
proyb wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, sadly shared hosting still limit with capped disk IO and bandwidth at a premium price which would be similar or more than competitive VPS in performance. I'm still looking out for competitive VPS provider other than UpCloud if you have any recommendations.

I think that most of the VPS providers have similar prices, I personally use DigitalOcean as I really like their interface.

True, I have been comparing performance and long-term contract which I have research on shared hosts and VPS providers.

Re: Offbase: Static site generator in a browser

#86

Post by kderbyma »

if anyone is interested. I have a similar project called Calliope which is open source and based on similar principles. except that you get the admin panel and can either serve or static generate your site.

I pushed out a starter template to make it easy to host a basic site with a few lines of code.

it's here (https://GitHub.com/ConflictingTheories/Calliope)

Re: Offbase: Static site generator in a browser

#87

Post by kderbyma »

I just moved all my simple websites to Calliope which is very similar but you can self host it if you want or wrap it docker behind a load balancer or generate the static site.

[Calliope](https://calliope.site)

it's on [GitHub](https://github.com/ConflictingTheories/Calliope). It's designed for a simple clone and start.

Re: Offbase: Static site generator in a browser

#88

Post by Ir0nMan »

Shared404 wrote: post #65
proyb wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, sadly shared hosting still limit with capped disk IO and bandwidth at a premium price which would be similar or more than competitive VPS in performance. I'm still looking out for competitive VPS provider other than UpCloud if you have any recommendations.

I like Linode personally. No BSD options, but they've got a pretty good selection of Linux distros as ready made images.

Same, I have been using Linode for almost 10 years for small projects.

Re: Offbase: Static site generator in a browser

#89

Post by sodimel »

jopsen wrote: post #67

How risky is it to run an Ubuntu server? Assuming you turn on auto-updates to get security updates.. and do basic hardening like fail2ban. Does it really need much handholding? (Assuming you don't run vulnerable versions of various server software inside a docker container) Curious, if going fully static is really that much better..

Its not really risky, but it requires some knowledge that not all people are willing to learn in order to host a html file to share thought.

Re: Offbase: Static site generator in a browser

#90

Post by masukomi »

deburr wrote: post #62
rubiquity wrote: post #45

I hate to be the person that needs to point it out, but you can't say replace "the cloud with x" and replace "servers with x" and then 500 pixels down the page talk about how you're pushing your static site to a CDN. Perhaps the target audience won't recognize how dishonest that is, but it's still a lie.

The buck stops earlier than that. "Replace the cloud/server with git" - where is git hosted? On your server or the cloud. You're not replacing anything.

yeah. if it ain't on a server / cloud no-one will be able to access it regardless of if it's in git or not.
Post reply on HN