I tried Jekyll and Gatsby.js, and albeit the latest is a mix of SSR
and SPA, I found some of their ideas in how to organize content to be
valuable, but I can't stand the tooling or the feeling of facing an
unneeded accidental complexity.
A bit the same feeling. All node lib in general, easy to load and play with, but when bad things happen, I���m lost missing debugging facilities, etc...
I���ve been meaning for ages to reimplement it in Smalltalk with a nice oo composite pipeline model and an easy way to debug and visualise what is going when getting your template right.
I���ve tried to restrain myself not to redo it in smalltalk but that would be great option. I don���t know the required effort though but I���ll be glad to be part of such project.
I spent the last weekend giving a try to that Gatbsy thing (nuxt.js
and vuepress are in the backlog too), and at 10PM on sunday I decided
to start coding something in Smalltalk, because it just feels better
to me.
Yes :)
Same, I���ve been trying Hugo and Jekyll.
Jekyll was cool for the integration in GitHub. But I don���t like the non immediate propagation of changes.
So I ended up using Hugo (+ I like that Hugo has lots of templates).
Still I was wondering, that if using Hugo and not have the full GitHub integration, then why not having something in pharo :)
You know I always try to refrain that �� do not reinvent the wheel �����. But that���s so hard sometimes.
(Side note: I use netlogo now to do some simulation - it���s a really cool software��� really��� still, when I really miss st environnement, is when you model become complex��� and when it comes to debug���. I���ve just spent two weeks debugging things��� so frustrating��� frankly with the exploration natively possible n smalltalk, I really think this would have been two days���)...
=> so cool you start to write something in st :)
I don't know how harder would it be, but that's a tool we currently
lack, the static-site generator. And we have support for different
templating, rendering canvas, and whatnot.
I agree. :). I loved and still love seaside but my needs are really simple to host website that do not take much processing to host. I want to have 1000 web site of my ridiculous box���
Most of the need are very low audience web site called �� vitrine �� in France.
I really hate that company sell such products thousands of euros��� (not kidding - a friend scam of mine is selling monthly fee like 140��� on a period up to 4 years !!!).
So maybe we need to discuss requirements.
1- generator based on template (mustache is cool) and partials
2- deal with comments, for submission in general, and maybe all info exchange through PR in git.
3- easy graphical template integration (so you can choose free or small fee templates for your site- say 10/20 bucks)
4- having some components that will give some live features whereas it���s static
��� this can come later this one.
������For instance, I want to provide a way to choose appointments, in a very smart way
������I���d like also to provide a stupid and simple little IoT that when a shop is open, it relates on the website, and vice-versa.
Etc...
I think 1 and 2 (and 3) are what���s needed by all web site generator.
2 is debatable (a must to me), but I find it clever. So you moderate comments through githubs tools (and eventually in conjunction with Iceberg).
3 is really important too. Again, easy at first but can become complex (depend on how many js plugins there are). I know at least two companies that���d be interested in developing graphic theme. The guy behind jekylltheme coud be interested too.
Generally a theme cost around 3000��� for a full personalized and unlimited one. Then for individual use, the cost is around 10/20���. Lots are free too but of course less advanced.
Combine this with the new headless image and it should easily plug into netlify .
Plus to netlify but also class export to servers. I thing Git(hubs) Pages are a nice option. In any cas, one nice pattern is to use git to store pages versions, and then you can replay on Pages / or on your own server / or on netlify.
When I think about netlify I don't think about an app (as in, an
executable) but as a simple static site, but if it possible to deploy
an app that is distributed and served by their CDN, then better!
Same. This is more an option to me. But I guess this is a vey nice feature to have.
I also wonder what would be possible with mini-image like Erik did.
I need to see more!
I don't know how independent a client image can be, how much you can
"pre-deploy" without needed to rehydrate the browser with server
changes, etc.
It's promising.
This is cherry on the cake but what a delicious one :)
Cheers,
C��drick