I look forward to migrating to 2.0. I use GatsbyJS 1 for many websites. One website I regenerate every morning to build over 1600 pages (https://frekvensapp.com). I’m told 2.0 has much better support for large sites.
Announcing Gatsby 2.0.0
31–36 of 36 posts
Re: Announcing Gatsby 2.0.0
#32The optimizations Gatsby does by default are great, especially if you're a web performance noob. But, I feel like Gatsby and static website generators in general are the product of front-end developers learning to code Javascript with no knowledge of HTML or the underlying technologies.
Nothing wrong with having a chance to make a website with your favorite front-end framework, but when you've been doing web apps with Javascript and websites with only a CSS framework if any, these generators just feel like a bit too much. Not everything needs to be an "app", if you catch my drift.
If you want to make a website that's blazing fast and you happen to know React well, Gatsby really is your best bet.
Re: Announcing Gatsby 2.0.0
#33Looking at moving a fairly large site to Gatsby. Hoping v2 improvements will help us.
Re: Announcing Gatsby 2.0.0
#34How viable is the enhancement of Gatsby with client side interactive stuff (maybe with Create React App widgets) on a Gatsby site?
I'm currently reasearching different workflows and tools where you can transition from a landing page to a saas without changing the dev environment that much.
The closest thing I've found is in the Laravel/Vue ecosystem, where you can start with a static site generator (Jigsaw), and progress into a full Laravel application from there, as it uses the same stuff under the hood minus the backend.
Re: Announcing Gatsby 2.0.0
#35My startup's website is currently built on Gatsby. I originally looked to it because we wanted to get something up very quickly for a tradeshow. 16 months later we've never gotten around to "we redo it down the road". It's still serving us very well.
My thoughts:
Pros:
* I love React, so Gatsby was a natural extension for me. It's very helpful to use the same toolchain/mindset in most places.
* I don't have to learn/forget/relearn all of the stupid bugs in Wordpress/Drupal/etc. Gatsby has some shortcomings, but in general if you've worked with React, you already know where the shortcomings and limitations are.
Cons:
* Deployment isn't terribly straight forward if you have a custom use case. I ended up manually building and serving with a small node script.
* It can be very, very (too easy) to accidentally share a server side ENV variable into the JS build. You have to be very careful not to leak an important key.
Re: Announcing Gatsby 2.0.0
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did. IMO, Hugo is the closest of any static gen to hitting the sweet spot of simplicity and feature set. However, there were some features that I simply could not add to it. Features that if I didn't have the tooling bogging me down, I could implement in 10 minutes. https://github.com/gohugoio/hugo/issues/3659 I can't fault Hugo for that GH issue though. The author's response is valid. I know I sound grumpy. Hugo i…
I took the approach of bolting a second compiler on top of Hugo(a custom Python script) to get the extra things I wanted in Hugo. It still took a while, but I did get to leverage the parts of Hugo that already work well. I don't think there's much in the way of winning either way, since now I have a Build Process.
But it's your compiler, that does exactly what you want.
;)