|
|
|
|
|
by adimitrov
2051 days ago
|
|
Same story here. I was looking for a static site gen that was a bit more comfortable than my previous shell scripts around pandoc approach. I settled on Hugo because it ticked all the boxes and even had org mode support. The next three nights were horrible. I'm a professional web dev, full stack, I've used dozens of langs, frameworks, probably hundreds of tools. It took me three nights to set up a basic home page for an academic CV and some publication lists. Nothing more. And even then the whole thing was wonky and super unreliable for inscrutable reasons. Big red flag. I was angry and frustrated, and I started doubting myself.
So I pulled the plug. Tried Zola, I was done in 1.5hrs. Start to finish, just done. Zola is great. |
|
Hours and days struggling with getting Hugo to do what I wanted until I gave up and had a Jekyll site up and running exactly how I wanted it within a few hours.
Who cares about saving 5 seconds site generation time when you lose days pulling your hair out just trying to get the damn thing to do what you want?
I've never felt that site generation time has been a problem for me, although I've only worked on things with 10s-100s of pages, not thousands... But then part of me wonders who it is out there who is doing site-wide updates to x,000 page sites who needs it to happen in 2 seconds? What kind of workflow on a site of that scale can't wait 30 seconds?