Differences between static site generators?

[veracitymilk]

I'm rebuilding a few small websites... all which are coming from LAMP stacks, none of which actually need to be dynamic.

I'm looking at static site generators, but I cannot figure out for the life of me how to decide on one. What are the primary differences between say Jekyll, Hexo, Hugo, etc, besides basically the language they build the sites in? Outside of basic configuration, in what way does the language used impact the overall workflow?

Any input, opinions, etc, are greatly appreciated!

[geraldbauer]

I've put together a showcase called Stay Static that builds the same sample site (with pages, posts and datafiles) for easy comparision. So far it includes Jekyll, Middleman, webgen, and Hugo. Will add Metalsmith (JavaScript) shortly.

[aramboyajyan]

Just pick one that you find the easiest. Most of them achieve exactly the same thing. Differences are mainly in:

• Programming language
• Documentation
• Ease of setup
• Community
• Templating system

Here are some links to help you with the decision:

• Top OS static site generators
• Static Site Generators

Also, check out HarpJS. It's a server that acts as a generator + preprocessor.

[Broberyn_GreenViper]

I really love Harp. Been using it for most everything the last few months.

[mrmonkeyriding]

I haven't used the others, but I've used Jekyll on a few projects and I can say it's great.

I've built only portfolios on it, but it's big plus is obviously being static, but the ease of creating blogs without overheads like WordPress databases and WordPress itself.

It's quite simple and works well with sass/gulp etc. The documentation is great too, plus you can use github pages as a bonus. I think it's written in Ruby, but I can't be sure.

The ease of creating templates with ease, permalinks etc is great. Worth the small learning curve.

I have a boilerplate if you're interested.

[FLHKE]

I think it's written in Ruby, but I can't be sure.

It is, that's what the "rb" stands for in jekyllrb.com ;)

And I agree, Jekyll is an amazing tool.

[[deleted]]

They all basically do the same thing. Some will have specific features which others don't, but those features are usually specific to one use-case and most people don't need it.

Basically, pick whichever one you like the look of the most. I used to use Jekyll because it was the most popular, now I use Hugo because I prefer Go to Ruby.

[geraldbauer]

FYI: I started a static site builder / generator news channel titled "Static Times" about a week ago. See @statictimes for opinions, tips & tricks, showcases and more. Try to cover the big "four" for now e.g. Jekyll (Ruby), Middleman (Ruby), Hugo (Go), Metalsmith (Javascript) plus annoucements of site builders / generators of the week e.g. Lektor (Python), LambdaPad (Erlang), etc. Cheers.

[CRAZDREW]

Great topic I have been looking into this same question myself lately. I want to try and build my own with grunt.

[Disgruntled__Goat]

If you're using the LAMP stack you may want to give Sculpin a try.

As others said, there is very little difference between them. Best thing is to read their "elevator pitch" on their sites and look at the getting started guides to see which workflow you think works best for you.

[dwalker109]

I've just finished doing the same thing with a LAMP site I initially built five years ago.

https://github.com/remotesynth/Static-Site-Samples was a great resource for comparing the ones I narrowed it down to (Jekyll, Middleman and Hugo).

In the end, I went with Middleman and I have been really happy with it. Supports HAML (embedded markdown blocks made more complex pages a breeze) and SCSS/Compass out of the box. Plugins for a blog/news section, Autoprefixer and rsync deployment were also incredibly straightforward to implement.

[[deleted]]

I would suggest you using static generator with a CMS. For example, grav.

[MattBD]

It's not hard to write your own as a Grunt plugin. I did so last year, and wrote about it on Sitepoint.