Lektor VS Jekyll

There is a somewhat similar system called Lektor, written by Armin Ronacher (of Flask/Jinja fame): https://www.getlektor.com/ You define your models, then start the local devserver to add entries for the models. In the end, it stores the data in the filesystem and outputs static HTML.

I have used a few static site generators over the years including Hugo, Jekyll, and Pelican to host my personal blog. And I have experimented with a few others including Lektor and Gatsby.

Lektor might be worth a look: https://www.getlektor.com/

After creating a site you start a local server by executing "lektor run" in the local folder, then preview the site in your webbrowser. There you get a edit-button whivh opens a backend with which you can edit the website. From that backend you can hit an upload button which allows you to push the static site directly to a remote (e.g. via scp)

Sphinx is great, lektor is amazing.

This somewhat reminds me of Lektor[0], which is a sort of front-end GUI application (really just website/page in front of a locally-run web server) that allows for folks to edit and post content as a static site generator and without needing a CLI. Lektor happens to be open source and based on python. This also reminds me of MovableType! Either way, I think we need more of these types of tools; both for techs and non-techs alike! Best of luck to the Kit55 folks!

[0] = https://www.getlektor.com/

https://www.getlektor.com/

lektor offers some of this functionality. editing is done locally through a browser UI, but there may be a way to host the interface. deployments are easy.

Shameless plug: If you want a static site generator with an admin UI I can recommend Lektor (https://www.getlektor.com/). You declare your data model and templates and Lektor serves an editing UI for you. There is a good video introduction by Armin Ronacher (original author) if you prefer to digest video content: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTWTCwuPdrU

Disclaimer: Occasionally I moonlight as a maintainer of Lektor.

Jekyll?

For the purposes of this tutorial, we will not be focusing on fine-tuning the site contents. Today, I will be deploying a simple static blog and have chosen to use Hugo as my framework (other popular alternatives for this purpose include 11ty, Astro, and Jekyll). I don't need any complex user interactions, so a static site generator is sufficient for my needs. If you plan to use Hugo as well, make sure it is installed on your machine. Then, open up a terminal (on Windows, it's recommended to use an Unix command line terminal or Powershell; Git Bash is usually the easiest option),

Jekyll, too, is likely to be gearing up for a major version release, based on the Jekyll version 5.0 Roadmap document published in October last year. For the thousands upon thousands of sites relying on Jekyll this will be welcome news, and may help to bring devs back to the SSG with which so many of us began building our static sites.

Jekyll • Simple, blog-aware, static sites | Transform your plain text into static websites and blogs

I've been getting increasingly frustrated using Jekyll to build my personal blog. It's great for what it is, but I don't know or really understand Ruby (nor do I want to at this point), and running updates, installing add-ons or even running it locally always seemed to be problematic. I loved how customisable everything was, but making changes or publishing articles wasn't quick or particularly easy (for me anyway).

Jekyll, the engine behind GitHub Pages, was the most popular SSG until Hugo came out. Written in Ruby, Jekyll is a great choice for writing blog sites. Jekyll can take your content written in Markdown and Liquid templates and render them to a static website deployed to a server of your choice. The site you're currently on is built using Jekyll and GitHub Pages.

I migrated my website from Jekyll to eleventy (11ty) recently. I wanted to preserve the same URLs for the vast majority of my webpages.

14. Jekyll

Check out https://jekyllrb.com/ and https://gohugo.io/ if you haven't seen it yet. GitHub action could compile your website to static HTML+CSS (and even some JS). You could host it wherever you want after that, incl. on GitHub page or from a container running on K8S. For the latter I'd recommend splitting CI from CD and use ArgoCD or similar. However as previously stated by others hosting static content on K8S is a mild anti-pattern and some form of a CDN should be used instead especially if it receives a lot of traffic.

Jekyll: https://jekyllrb.com/