[hereonout2]

Not sure I follow, do you not use templates and scripts to generate the static pages?

I was a web developer 25 years ago and for the majority of projects we only made static sites, all templated and minified. My skills are somewhat "of that time".

Recently I was asked to build a site to demonstrate some new software. It consisted of over 10k pages that once built would rarely, if ever be updated.

I just scripted and templated the generation of every single page hosted it in S3. This may sound ridiculous in this day and age but it takes a few minutes to rebuild and update the entire site.

Guess my point is I don't really find duplicating things to be a pain in the ass

[corytheboyd]

I don’t think it sounds ridiculous, it sounds like you picked the right tool for the job. Don’t bring dynamic solutions to static problems…

[chefandy]

What the grandparent comment was referring to was eschewing static site generators in favor of entirely handmade html and css. The person you’re responding to was arguing in favor of static site generators for the reasons they listed. I was advocating for a simpler breed of SSGs than we have now for simple tasks, and this project seems to fit that niche. Most SSGs these days are only trivial if you’ve got current web developer knowledge at your finger tips.

[sabellito]

Yes, that's what I meant.

[MortyWaves]

That isn’t ridiculous and is in fact how the bulk of modern static site generators work. Hugo, Jeykll, Astro (the one I use), etc.