Hello Shlomi and Marco! > 1. How is Hugo superior to Pelican wrt the gimp.org site?
There are a few ways (this is based roughly on a fun dive through various static site generators over the last 6-7 years): 1. It's a self-contained binary for the generator. No other requirements or dependencies. 2. It's under very active development by the community and pushes updates and security fixes almost every month (or a couple of times a month). 3. It's FAST to build a site. Right now if you change something in gimp.org with Pelican it takes around 3-4 minutes to build the site. Hugo has been building in a few seconds (for some of the other sites I've done that are not too far off in similar size). 4. The source/output file organization is a better mental model of how a site would normally be built (pages for directories, lists, etc etc - I had to hack at Pelican to get the generator to build output similar to what was sitting on disk.). 5. Easy i18n support out of the box (this might require some modifications to interface with po files to support marco, I'll look into it). 6. Did I mention it's fast? 7. We (pixls.us folks) have migrated all of the sites we're managing over to Hugo already (just finished up the darktable.org migration) so it makes it easier for me to ask other users to help out as they're already familar with the tooling (asking them to look at pelican usually results in silence in IRC... :D :D :D ). I have not gotten a consensus per se, other than to see if current people hacking at it would be ok with it (nmat, maybe Jehan but I haven't bothered him with this yet). Ultimately my hope would be that we can lower the barrier to entry for creating content/posts on the site and possibly engage the broader community more (one can hope...). Hopefully that makes sense? On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 8:45 AM Marco Ciampa via gimp-web-list < gimp-web-list@gnome.org> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 03:05:21PM +0300, Shlomi Fish wrote: > > Hi Pat! > > > > On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 09:43:19 -0500 > > Pat David via gimp-web-list <gimp-web-list@gnome.org> wrote: > > > > > Howdy! > > > > > > We have a few different web properties that are handled a little > > > differently. > > > > > > Primarily we have https://www.gimp.org which is the main website > people > > > usually find. > > > This site is currently a static website built using the Pelican > generator > > > (Python 3 right now). > > > The repo for the website is here: > > > https://gitlab.gnome.org/Infrastructure/gimp-web > > > > > > I would like to migrate this to use Hugo (https://gohugo.io) instead. > > > > A few questions: > > > > 1. How is Hugo superior to Pelican wrt the gimp.org site? > > Good point. I thought that hugo was better for the asciidoc support but > since also Pelican can do asciidoc (see: > > https://duncanlock.net/blog/2021/01/12/using-asciidoc-and-asciidoctor-for-blogging/ > ) > I really have no preference. I am really rooting for asciidoc for the > website... > > -- > > Saluton, > Marco Ciampa > _______________________________________________ > gimp-web-list mailing list > gimp-web-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-web-list > -- https://patdavid.net GPG: 66D1 7CA6 8088 4874 946D 18BD 67C7 6219 89E9 57AC _______________________________________________ gimp-web-list mailing list gimp-web-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-web-list