21–30 of 38 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, I was referring to these plugins: http://octopress.org/docs/plugins/
Oh, I get it. Those plugins are "compile-time" -- so they happen during the HTML generation process, before going up to github -- all github ever sees is static HTML and CSS files.
Ever since I installed Wappalyzer in my browser (detects what frameworks and technologies a website uses) more and more often I come across websites that I am shocked use so many backend and frontend frameworks. I'm shocked because that means they are spending unnecessary amounts of money, time and effort on hosting (e.g. Wordpress hosting), development and maintenance when the entire site would be perfectly well-ser…
Also, it's not really wasting time or money -- cheap shared hosting costs the same regardless of whether you're serving a php/mysql app or static html files. And setting up a wordpress site is probably easier for non-programmers than getting a jekyll setup going.
It's definitely a colossal waste of CPU power though, but that train left the station 10 years ago.
Ever since I installed Wappalyzer in my browser (detects what frameworks and technologies a website uses) more and more often I come across websites that I am shocked use so many backend and frontend frameworks. I'm shocked because that means they are spending unnecessary amounts of money, time and effort on hosting (e.g. Wordpress hosting), development and maintenance when the entire site would be perfectly well-ser…
I agree that a lot of frameworks are overkill, but if you put yourself in the frame of mind of a non-programming designer or a layperson who just needs to manage content on their site, using a static HTML generation tool is out of the question. I've been using octopress/jekyll recently and think it's amazing and really love it, but there's no way in a million years I could give that to a client to manage their own we…
Or a reversal to geocities days ... :-/
One thing I did with it was create a Web site with recipes on it. The recipe files didn't have any actual content, everything was stored in the metadata. I had the Rules file set up so that they would run the Recipes through a layout that would expand them to HTML (consistently), then that was run through the normal page template.
It also used a preprocess rule to generate fresh items "on the fly" that serve as indices for each recipe type. Again, no content - the Rules file is set up so that the artificial items get all their content from a layout before being actually layouted with the site template.
Ever since I installed Wappalyzer in my browser (detects what frameworks and technologies a website uses) more and more often I come across websites that I am shocked use so many backend and frontend frameworks. I'm shocked because that means they are spending unnecessary amounts of money, time and effort on hosting (e.g. Wordpress hosting), development and maintenance when the entire site would be perfectly well-ser…
I agree that a lot of frameworks are overkill, but if you put yourself in the frame of mind of a non-programming designer or a layperson who just needs to manage content on their site, using a static HTML generation tool is out of the question. I've been using octopress/jekyll recently and think it's amazing and really love it, but there's no way in a million years I could give that to a client to manage their own we…
If you're interesting in this, you should also check out Octopress, which sits on top of Jekyll and provides a nice default theme, handy addons (for google site search, disqus comments, twitter/facebook sharing, etc.), and deployment scripts. http://octopress.org/
Does GitHub support Jekyll plugins? I doubt they'd be willing to run arbitrary code for everyone...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, I get it. Those plugins are "compile-time" -- so they happen during the HTML generation process, before going up to github -- all github ever sees is static HTML and CSS files.
But github does that part for you. You push up the raw files AND Github runs Jekyll and generates the HTML files.
I have never used Jekyll. I do, however, frequently use nanoc[1] - it takes a bit more effort to set up, but it is far more flexible, because instead of ridiculous configuration files, you are actually writing Ruby code (in a very nice DSL, might I add) that controls how each set of files is compiled. One thing I did with it was create a Web site with recipes on it. The recipe files didn't have any actual content, ev…
I have never used Jekyll. I do, however, frequently use nanoc[1] - it takes a bit more effort to set up, but it is far more flexible, because instead of ridiculous configuration files, you are actually writing Ruby code (in a very nice DSL, might I add) that controls how each set of files is compiled. One thing I did with it was create a Web site with recipes on it. The recipe files didn't have any actual content, ev…
And even more simple and powerful than nanoc: http://stasis.me
I think Stasis is great in theory, but a few things are preventing me from using it full time. Namely that I can't pass simple options to a template engine (of which I do a lot).
It appears that you're the author. Can you offer any information on how Stasis is, in some ways, better than nanoc?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But github does that part for you. You push up the raw files AND Github runs Jekyll and generates the HTML files.
Could you have this as a two stage process? Make changes to files, push to my repo, repo hook runs jeckyll, commits new static assets, and pushes to github? This does require using a central server other than github I guess, though...