Hugo VS Nikola

I have migrated from Jekyll to Hugo for my own website, but the whole Hugo project is just weird. It took me like a year to migrate my simple website because of all the different paper cuts that drained my will to work on it.

You are only able to only use partials in HTML pages and shortcodes in Markdown pages. Why? They use 2 different syntax, so the best you can do is awkwardly wrap a partial in a shortcode. What's the point? They serve basically the same purpose.

Want to set up RSS? Oh yeah, for some reason by default it will not show full content in your feed reader, instead only a small extract with the only way to fix it is by making your own template[1]. But wait, why are we using RSS instead of Atom? Who knows, but if you want to use Atom, you have to use your template and insert some stuff to your config.

Also don't look at the bug tracker, that thing is frustrates me to no end.

You of course have the everyone's favourite Stalebot that you might have noticed in my previous link, but if you look at older issues, you will see the maintainer self-botting as a Stalebot[2][3] for some reason.

You will also see the maintainer moving issues between milestones for years with no end in sight[4].

Changelogs can sometimes feel a bit, odd too:

> but also a big shoutout to @dependabot[bot], […] for their ongoing contributions.

And commit messages sometimes are just… a bit too long[5] (it is truncated by GitHub, you can append .patch to see the full message).

Their documentation is awful to read too[6]. Oh and the templating engine? Yeah, not documented at all. Also the quick start guide will tell you to git clone some random theme, but I don't want my website to look like someone's, I want to write my own styles and have my own structure, but they don't really tell you anywhere how you should go about it. Because of it, I would search GitHub to sometimes find answers on how to do some stuff, but you would quickly find that most people had no idea how to actually use it. For example you can find a lot of people making opening and ending partials to have a common page layout instead of actually using the built-in Hugo layouts.

So why have I bothered switching? i18n support, so far out of all SSG I tried, Hugo does it in the least painful way.

[1]: https://github.com/gohugoio/hugo/issues/4071

[2]: https://github.com/gohugoio/hugo/issues/385#issuecomment-283...

[3]: https://github.com/gohugoio/hugo/issues/1035#issuecomment-28...

[4]: https://github.com/gohugoio/hugo/issues/448

[5]: https://github.com/gohugoio/hugo/commit/6dbde8d731f221b027c0...

[6]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30527884

That issue should have been closed. This was resolved in Hugo 112. https://github.com/gohugoio/hugo/releases/tag/v0.112.0

The fact that Hugo still doesn't play nicely with Tailwind 3 (2 years after T3 was released) is a real pain point.

I gave up on this ever being fixed quite a while back, but still check on the issue [1] every now and then. Seems like the only activity these days is bep bumping the milestone every month.

[1]: https://github.com/gohugoio/hugo/issues/8343

For creating a static site I recommend Hugo. In short this is because it is popular, well-supported, fast, and allows you to get up and running quickly with premade templates.

I use Hugo. Creating templates was admittedly not easy at first. But as soon as you understand it, you can implement a lot with it.

Export content written in Notion to markdown, compatible for [Hugo](https://gohugo.io/) blog.

You can use Notion as a CMS in order to author, edit, and manage all your content while leverage the power of Hugo in order to serve the content statically on your blog site. This lets you leverage the best of both worlds - powerful and expressive UX of Notion for authoring along with speed and pre-built feature rich themes from Hugo for personal blog site.

The package ships with a script in order to export content from Notion in a compatible format.

```

After using Hugo on an Arch-based Linux machine for a while, I realized that a clean, up-to-date, and well-maintained Hugo package is missing. I found/used the following existing packages:

Something like Hugo might be of interest to you.

I do the same thing, via hugo - I can choose to use markdown, HTML, make use of the templates, or ignore the template and just output raw text or HTML.

You can - you'd basically just create a python script that parses your HTML/CSS files and replaces strings with values from your YAML. However I wouldn't recommend that unless you're just using this as an opportunity to learn Python. If you want to standup a real site and you want to use python, I'd recommend a Python static site generator like Pelican or Nikola.

I tend to prefer static site generators for this kind of use case. I use Nikola, which is written in and based on Python. You should be able to pick whatever html5up template you like and turn it into a Nikola template, too.

I switched to Nikola recently: https://getnikola.com/

Reads every kind of plaintext format, but will also just publish a Jupyter notebook which means you can do drag and drop image and graph inlining which makes everything so much simpler (and thus makes me more likely to keep it up).

I've been using Nikola and am happy with it: https://github.com/getnikola/nikola

Might be this static site generator: https://getnikola.com/

Found it by searching [nikola software].

I know you say you're comfortable with your workflow, but just wanted to throw out that if you're not dependent on Jekyll, and are simply looking for the best way to create a static site/blog from org-mode files, you could consider Nikola as an alternative. It has an excellent org-mode plugin which would likely solve your complication.

I also know that there is also Python-based Lektor [2], however I found Nikola more intriguing than this one.

[0] https://getnikola.com/