Jekyll VS Nanoc

In terms of GitHub stars, SSGs like Next.js, Hugo, Gatsby, Docusaurus, Nuxt.js, and Jekyll top the list. Some popular SSGs even host conferences and workshops, providing resources and networking opportunities for those looking to explore more advanced topics in depth.

I created my blog using Jekyll, a great open-source tool that can transform your markdown content into a simple, old-fashioned-but-trendy, static site. What are the advantages of this approach? The site is super-light, super-fast, super-secure and SEO-friendly. Of course, it’s not always the best solution, but for some use cases, like a simple personal blog, it’s really a good option.

It's an error related with this issue: https://github.com/jekyll/jekyll/issues/8523

Yes, it's Markdown and I use https://jekyllrb.com with the theme "jekyll-theme-hacker" to generate the site. I quite like how simple it is.

Context is everything. In the context of Jekyll, all of this is certainly a useful feature: this is not code that needs to be re-used or maintained in the same way as your Rails project has to be.

As always, engage your brain before doing anything and you don't need to use these features, but it gives you the tools to do "smart things" that Go simply can't. This, among other things, means that Jekyll will scale reasonably well with your website as your needs grow, without having to add features to Jekyll core, using your own fork of Jekyll, or switching to something completely different.

For example, I have a little plugin[1] to work around a bug[2] and to skip the hard-coded requirement to have a date in the filename.[3] Is this ugly? Yes. Is this fine to generate a relatively simple personal website? Also yes.

[1]: https://github.com/arp242/arp242.net/blob/master/_plugins/no...

[2]: https://github.com/jekyll/jekyll/issues/8707

[3]: https://stackoverflow.com/a/68287682/660921

Jekyll is a static site generator. It takes text written in your favorite markup language and uses layouts to create a static website. You can tweak the site’s look and feel, URLs, the data displayed on the page, and more.

I'm using bridgetown because I like sitting on the bleeding edge, its basically a newer Jekyll which I would recommend checking out too. Bridgetown has a great modern dev experience but its missing some of the ecosystem from Jekyll. Not a problem for me because I'm really comfortable with Ruby.

Takodje, ako nisi cuo za Jekyll, baci pogled. Ima vec brda Themes tako da mozes da customizujes nesto za svoje potrebe. Generalno se to koristi za GitHub pages.

If you want to have a different UI or your blog to look in a very specific way I recommend using Jekyll or Bridgetown.

When we decided to open-source our blog and docs, we were spoilt for choices. Today there are multiple well-supported and fully-featured frameworks for open-source content creation. Some of the options that we considered were Ghost, Jekyll, Hugo, Nanoc, and Gatsby. There are even more frameworks beyond these, and each tool has its pros and cons. Which one do we recommend? Well, we don’t. The best tool for you is the one that fulfills your requirements.

My websites use a static site generator, that means I have folders of Markdown files and they get converted by this program to HTML. (I'm using nanoc for nearly a decade, but other generators work fine. I like Ruby, so that's why I never tried any of the new JS stuff.) I don't just hit publish on my whole Zettelkasten, but that would work as well if you point your static site generator to your note archive.

Last time I was evaluating static site generators, Dimples and Nanoc both stood out for this recent-updates reason, among other personal criteria.

https://github.com/waferbaby/dimples

https://nanoc.ws/