| I think you make a very valid point, so thanks for raising it. This isn't the first time today I've received this feedback. I've historically used github pages and found it kind of lacking. Many repos will have a completely separate branch for the static site -- which feels awkward and hidden. Further, not every static site needs an associated GH repo, especially for prototyping. There's friction there and doesn't perfectly line up with use cases I've had on previous projects. For example, I can create an unlimited number of different static sites using a single repo with pgs.sh. Things like monorepos with many static sites are comfortably in our wheelhouse. Especially when it comes to prototyping, I want something that I can spin up very quickly, without the ceremony of creating a repo, creating a static site project, installing tools, setting up CI, etc. pgs.sh doesn't need any tooling or external services to be fully usable on its own. For example, I'm building a static site generator for git (https://pgit.pico.sh). When I was prototyping, I didn't want to immediately setup static site hosting through traditional means. I just wanted my prototypes published so I can see how it looked. The north star here is: what is required to publish a static site? With pgs, it's just an SSH key-pair. Having said all that, ease-of-use with GH Pages is right up there with pgs.sh and I see how we are competing with that excellent service. |
> Especially when it comes to prototyping
That makes sense! You're definitely right that github pages does have added friction for mono-repos and also the sporadic projects I have.