also a fan of Jekyll and gh-pages tho agree the setup can be a bit of a nuisance. perhaps a few too many small bumps (ruby version/gem management/using the console) for a non technical user.

kirby is another lightweight solution with an admin panel that I’ve used for small projects. You do have to do a little php templating but the api and docs are nice and simple.

Hugo looks great and looks like it plays with gh-pages but I’ve not used it.

1 Like

This is geared towards generation of “documentation” - which can really be anything - and I’ve had good results with it:

http://www.mkdocs.org

2 Likes

i use/have used various things (dotclear, pluxml, nikola, homemade back-ends…) to manage and display websites content, but these days, for my personal notes (not publicly served yet) i have come back to … writing everything in static files by hand.

With the help of a markdown-to-html editor for longer text blocks, and a text editor featuring multiple-files-search-and-replace, i have everything i need and it gets much faster to the point than any static site generator i have tried. For the very minimal design and structure i chose, i found it easier to start from a blank canvas than to try and adapt pre-existing templates. Sometimes even very practical and elegant tools introduce too much overhead.

2 Likes

I’ve been using ghost for my website, it’s very basic but it’s clean and helped me learn markdown. I haven’t messed with it lately but the development team seems active. not sure if this is what you’re looking for since i don’t understand much that’s being said in this thread, but my 2 cents

www.ghost.org

my site for example: www.bookmil.com I gotta renew my domain name…

1 Like

For those who want to go static and don’t want to use the terminal I can recommend Cactus. Its a Mac app with a gui which helps you start, maintain and deploy a blog, portfolio and other templates.

It seems their main website is down, but here’s the latest version. And here’s a tutorial with some more info.

That said I’m currently using Perun, a Clojure static site generator, for the custom audio diary I’m currently building. Choosing it over Cactus as I need some extra custom capabilities (upload of audio, generation of waveforms), but it’s not as easy to start with as Cactus.

7 Likes

I am a long time Wordpress user (since 2005). Plugins can still be a pain in the ass with WP. I like Medium.com although the functionality has changed a lot, but in general it’s very convenient. Weird thing is that I get extremely low views using Medium compared to my WP blogs.

Sometimes I like to create a site from scratch, although I am far from a CSS expert, but it’s fun to do. For example this one I made for a audiodocumentary I did: http://oostendehealing.nl

I guess making your own static pages with an index is a nice alternative. Time consuming but you might end up with a very personal looking website.

3 Likes

I use kirby for my website www.kenyamamoto.de which is text based and minimalist because as a writer I don’t really need more. It’s easy to set up and doesn’t rely on database cause it’s file based.

4 Likes

Consensus might be tough, as variations can be subtle and come down to personal taste, but hopefully this discussion will inspire some new thinking about how to approach the problem.

2 Likes

imho,
we define our creations/intentions, yes? :slight_smile:

I’m still using Wordpress in many places. That said, I use it with many caveats:

  • I avoid the maze of twisty plugins all alike wherever possible, using a handful of things to extend core functionality and mainly writing my own code as appropriate. Hand-coded theme, tiny functions.php that includes lots of other modules
  • Lots of domain-specific objects - not using Posts for everything but having all manner of Top-Level Objects with custom fields; essentially using it as a CMS framework.
  • Very aggressive static caching all over the shop
  • version control contains a deployable version of the site
  • …which is deployed with automated tooling (in this case, Capistrano).

I’ve been looking at making the whole thing work using Composer and cap, but it’s not quite there yet - it’d be lovely to just store my code in a repository and yank the CMS as a dependency. I might yet try this for another project, though.

Here’s the thing: I like SSGs in principle, but end up hating them in practice. I inevitably have to learn a pile of new things, mainly because I like making nicely modelled things rather than piles of hacks. Sometimes a new language. (Don’t get me wrong, I hate PHP with a fiery passion, but it’s easy to deploy).

And: if I’m ever without my laptop, and a toolchain: making new content is hard. "Just write Markdown, compile, and rsync" is awesome until you don’t have a full checkout of your site, or an SSH tool, or a development-build machine. By contrast: XML-RPC saves my bacon from time to time when I just have a phone to hand.

Everything people say about static HTML is true, but SSGs do require one to make a different set of compromises.

Of all of them, I was most keen on Hugo, since go compiles to binaries - meaning no bloody toolchain installation, just hugo - though I really was not enjoying the docs or tinkering with it at all. So it might be time to play with Jekyll again.

3 Likes

That’s why I think it’s a good idea to have a web accessible admin for content editing (as several SSGs now support, although I think Jekyll needs an add-on to get this functionality).

It needn’t be at the same URL or even the same machine as the public website, just needs to be somewhere you can conveniently access from your phone or whatever.

But it also sounds like you’ve made peace with Wordpress, which is totally fine. It’s just that getting there is not a process I’d wish on an enemy. I too have made a sort of peace with Wordpress (if you deal with enough websites over the years, you kind of have to). It just isn’t my preference any longer.

1 Like

I’ve been looking at SSGs for a while now, but I almost always end up using WordPress. If you want a web admin view anyway, then WordPress with caching is basically the same thing, no?

But the simplicity of a SSG is alluring.

1 Like

Assuming you don’t have a lot of plugins that do dynamic stuff then Wordpress with caching is not bad. One downside is security. It helps to have a web host that will automatically update your Wordpress install for you.

Since Wordpress 3.7, “By default, every site has automatic updates enabled for minor core releases and translation files.”
https://codex.wordpress.org/Configuring_Automatic_Background_Updates

Another reason to use an SSG is that I find it simpler to create a model-driven content site using an SSG than with Wordpress. What I mean by model-driven is the idea that you have specific content types that are presented in specific ways, structured in a way that allows for consistency without requiring content editors to be knowledgeable about markup. It is entirely possible to do this with Wordpress as well, but I’ve found it to be more effort. This level of effort also makes the siren call of plugins promising to make the task easier that much more tempting. But you can see in this thread that even the Wordpress aficionados recommend avoiding the twisty maze of plugins, all alike.

I’m not going to claim that it isn’t possible to make peace with Wordpress. I just don’t really see the point.

I’m most definitely not an aficionado :wink:

2 Likes

So to back this up for those of us who stopped writing pages from scratch some time around the dawn of this new millennium (Dreamweaver, text editor), if all I really want to do is post straightforward short essay length pieces, with occasional embedded images, have it be web-based so I can publish from anywhere at any time, not be self-hosted, and I don’t particularly care about static vs. dynamic (although would slightly prefer static if possible), is there anything remotely approaching a consensus on which two or three platforms might be most appropriate?

Alternatively, as odious as it surely sounds, is there any online platform that is somewhat close to FB’s mode of creating posts [ducks]?

Does Dreamweaver still exist?

Do Bobcats dream in color?

Let’s get the important stuff out of the way first. Bobcats probably do dream in color.

Dreamweaver still exists.

Hammer for Mac is a desktop app, similar to Cactus, mentioned above, but with a currently working website of its own.

Kirby and Grav are two file based CMSs, so they don’t suffer from problems related to exposing a database to the web.
https://getkirby.com/
https://getgrav.org/

If you like Markdown and think you might want to use Github Pages (AKA gh-pages) for free hosting, then you want to look at Hugo, or Lektor, or Jekyll. Consensus seems to be that Hugo is most user friendly.


https://www.getlektor.com/

I’m sorry, that’s still more than two or three.

5 Likes

Honestly your use case sounds like www.ghost.org

Built for straightforward text based posts. I embed images by uploading them to flickr and then linking. It’s web based (I think they made a desktop app as well).

2 Likes

i run two self hosted ghost instances. Easy to set up (my first time using nodejs toolchain), and very easy to use as a post author (markdown with live preview, drag and drop images…).
Themes, i have not really messed up with, but making one is not harder than any other solution.

Do you have a link to instructions on how to self-host Ghost? I couldn’t find anything via their website.