[bmelton]

The 'backend' here is ... HTML. For read-only a blog, that's likely more than enough. Otherwise, for dynamic content like contact forms and such, I don't know if there's a meaningful benefit to building out a whole site in PHP/Python/Rails or something (and paying commensurately more in hosting) than to use Formspree or something similar.

Yes, it calls an API. And thankfully with Formspree, it's pretty easy to see the price breakeven points vs. hosting, but there are benefits to be had.

[dgb23]

Content has to come from somewhere. Operational complexity is increased, not decreased, since you are running a build server in addition to your CMS. The benefit is easier optimizations in the frontend.

[lotyrin]

Yeah, but you're only running your build server some of the time (which is favorable in this era of by-the-second pricing) and you're running it inside a private network where nobody can try to infiltrate it 24/7 for no good reason.

[Cthulhu_]

But you can outsource those (build server, CMS) to e.g. Netlify and Contentful.

But if you don't want that, there's a billion alternatives; the CMS market is one of the most saturated ones out there.

[subpixel]

I actually feel like Gatsby will be developing a CMS to round out their paid feature-set. I have zero-inside knowledge, just a hunch that to get customers to pay up handsomely, the product needs a deeper "fit" in the publishing pipeline.

[bmelton]

Content can come from text files. Operational complexity ought to be neutral (or even negative) if that content compilation step replaces your CI pipeline.