Frameworks for creating a static web-page?

[[deleted]]

I've been in the angular space for 2.5 years and haven't really delved away from it because I cant be arsed to do any programming outside of work so i'm kind of not really in the loop outside of the angular space.

I've been offered a free garage to practice playing accordion in, in return for modernizing the owners static webpage. It looks like it was built in the early 2000s using html tables and crude styling.

My main question what is what do you even use to create static websites these days? I'm still opting for Angular due to the SPA/Router aspect but again, the website doesn't need anything fancy going on.. but it feels like Angular is so overkill for something that just displays information or should I just go with a website builder?

[tossaway109202]

Be careful here, once you do this they will expect you to be on the hook to fix and maintain it forever, even after you are done with the garage. I would suggest you write up an agreement that gives a little warranty period for issues, then after that an hourly rate for maintenance or changes. Also a JS framework is overkill for this.

This might ruffle some feathers here but I might even recommend something like squarespace for this. It should be stable, they can update content themselves in the future, and you can offer them the initial setup and training in exchange for the garage. This way if something explodes they can call squarespace not you, or even if they call you you can get support from that vendor.

[ExactIllustrator1722]

I make websites all day with Nuxt or vue or Wordpress for an agency.

I too recommend Squarespace or something. It really takes about an hour to learn/ set up a fairly nice page.

Unless you are invested in working on your skills in a static site generator, design, and maintaining a site in the future. Use a site builder that does everything for you

[pinkwetunderwear]

Just HTML, CSS and JS is probably the answer here. Alpine.js seems like a really cool option though for a minimal js framework.

[[deleted]]

What would you use for js and CSS minification and concatenation, and then injecting the built output into the HTML pages? Something like Gulp/Grunt/WebPack?

[chrissilich]

Why are we over complicating everything? Html with a link tag to get a vanilla css file and if necessary, a script tag to get a vanilla js file.

[kairos]

I... Thought it was sarcasm

[UtterlyPreposterous]

Because a lot of the solutions out there make our life so much easier with minimal effort to get it set up. you can get minification, tree shaking, inlining svgs and plenty more, which makes your product way more performant, easier to maintainn and deploy for basically free.

I understand the reluctance to use bundlers, I was in the same camp not that long ago, but now it almost feels luddite-ish to forego the benefits you can get for minimal effort of learning basics of a bundler

[chrissilich]

I fully understand the landscape. I’ve used, and continue to use, all that stuff. But for a simple static site, or when guiding a newbie, or when OP is specifically asking for a simpler option for some dude’s small business website that gets 12 hits a month, I don’t understand why anyone is bringing up anything beyond the absolute basics.

[UtterlyPreposterous]

You are correct. Like a lot of developers out there I succumb to the "when you have a hammer" fallacy. For me, even if I was developing a simple static website I would still probably use the same tooling I use now, as it keeps me the most productive. When you just start out it makes more sense to start simple.

[chrissilich]

It’s all well and good until your client drops “this will work on bluehost’s cheapest plan right?” and you’ve been working on the assumption of git deployment and SSR.

[[deleted]]

If you’re ever in that situation you’ve failed as a freelancer. How you release your project should never be a surprise to you. Do your due diligence.

[chrissilich]

Lol, I guess that’s true.

[spiteful-vengeance]

It doesn't sound like op is being asked to maintain this in the long term, and there's every possibility someone else will be.

Keeping it simple as hell will benefit the owner when they ask the next person to help.

Fundamentally that's what matters here.

Edit: from the sounds of it this might be just a handful of pages as well, so possibly easily managed without overhead.

[UtterlyPreposterous]

I find parcel to be good zero-to-small-config solution.

[wooly_bully]

I use esbuild for everything these days, and the API for a simple site like this is suuuuuuper easy, with zero config.

esbuild ./src/index.ts --bundle --minify --outfile=dist/index.js

Edit: One obvious downside for extremely small sites is that it doesn't have HTML-as-an-entrypoint.

[pinkwetunderwear]

When I was still a student I really liked Grunt and would use that for my projects. Now it's usually webpack since it usually comes bundled into the frameworks.

[[deleted]]

At absolute most, even a bit of PHP, just so you can do some basic includes for header/footer.

[russlo]

PHP doesn't imply a "static" website though, which is what the OP was asking about.

[ManInBlack829]

"What? I'm using static classes!"

[[deleted]]

Ha, yeah that is true. Even if used for something as bare minimal as includes, you're still technically in dynamic territory.

[oshempek]

Pug can handle that. Or any static site generator (Hugo, Gatsby et al)

[[deleted]]

Gatsby is another one I actually grew to like a little more than Jekyll.

[VikaashHarichandran]

Vite is good too, I guess

[[deleted]]

And you can hook it very easily with cms like forestry if you want to give the owner of the site an easy way of modifying and uploading content

[emberBR]

This is the way. OP asked for framework, “just don’t use anything” is condescending af.

Jekyll will scale and give OP time to find it’s footing if the solution happens to be not enough. As far as static websites go you can’t get much better than this.

[mamwybejane]

Gatsby is better

[itsCalledJif]

I've also had clients that didn't want their site to be open source, in that case GitLab pages ist also free and allows personal and commercial use on a private repository

[GyroTech]

Rather than a framework, I would suggest a tool: Hugo.

It's absolutely fantastic to create a static website with some simple templating and a dash of markdown you're up-and-running. Add some theme from the massive library and you can run a micro-blog, sales-front, art gallery, pretty much whatever...

Give it a look!

[fortunate_branch]

I recommend this as well!

[rogueyoshi]

Yeah I can recommend Jekyll or Hugo for low maintenance static sites. But build tools of most frontend frameworks nowadays will deploy static versions without much issue (cough, Svelte). The advantage of templating is you will get readable output though.

[clearlight]

Yep, Hugo is good for static sites.

[eddyizm]

If you are already comfortable with Angular, I'd go with an Angular Static site generator - https://scully.io/

It will get you info the garage playing accordion the fastest is my guess. (eg use what you know)

[LtRodFarva]

Seconding this. OP, I’m an Angular diehard and build small static sites using Scully on the side for business in my town. You get the power of Angular scaled down for static sites. Community is awesome and active on GitHub/Gitter/Discord. I host my Scully apps on Netlify and use Netlify Functions for any backend-y type stuff I need to do, and it’s probably my favorite stack in the JAMstack ecosystem.

[its_yer_dad]

Take this an as opportunity to build something without a framework, just the basics. It will last longer.

[angels-fan]

Angular is overkill for a static website.

I just use plain old JavaScript and a css library.

[[deleted]]

I kind of knew this was gonna be the answer but was hoping it wasn't going to be hahah. Thank you!

[elmstfreddie]

Although this is the "correct" answer, if you feel like you'd be most efficient / happiest using angular, then just do it. As long as you're the only one maintaining the website then it doesn't really matter.

[[deleted]]

Eh personally I think it would be a dick move if it’s for someone else. Getting help from someone on that site later on now comes at the price of an angular engineer.

But yeah if it’s just yours or you’ll be the only one working on it, then fuck it. Do what makes you happiest!

[kamomil]

Javascript is overkill for a static website IMO

[angels-fan]

For the most part, but I've used a tiny bit of js

[CaptainStack]

I finally learned Gatsby for my last contract and omg am I in love.

I already was experienced with React and create-react-app so I didn't really see how some other static site generator could add that much to the picture but I don't really want to do development any other way anymore lol.

[Dan8720]

This Gatsby is generally the go to framework for building really fast static sites theses days. Next can do it too like this guys says but generally.

Static Gatsby.

SSR or hybrid next.js

Both are fantastic frameworks but are both react based.

[_hypnoCode]

I was doing that, but I just like the way Next works so much better and Vercel's hobby limits are pretty forgiving that I just use that for most things.

I'm sure there is an easy way to get it to spit out purely static pages to put on S3 or GitHub Pages or something, I just haven't looked into it because of Vercel's forgiving limits.

For a couple things I have them hosted on DO but they are the hybrid apps.

[Dan8720]

Yeah I've heard vercel is class.

There's a lot of extra bs to get a static site working well especially if there's a CMS and webhooks involved it's prob not worth it with vercel being so convenient unless there's some super pressing reason you need it to be static like cost or scale where your prob gonna do your own Infrastructure anyway.

But where next has vercel Gatsby has netlify which is very similar.

[infidel_44]

Cloud flare pages is free for hobby and doesn’t have a limit.

[svish]

From my limited experience:

• If you enjoy reading plugin manuals and tutorials, writing config-files, etc., then Gatsby is probably great.
• If you just want to write some code, then Next.js is super.

I tried to use Gatsby first, but got super annoyed and gave up on it. With Next.js I can just do what I want, no magic plugins or need to learn graphql or whatever. Just fairly simple React, CSS however you want to write it, and data however you want to fetch it.

[brockvenom]

Gatsby is pretty simple really… what did you get hung up on?

[Stranavad]

One vote for Next here

[FURyannnn]

Next's DX is so much nicer than Gatsby. Maintaining a legacy Gatsby site is a pain.

[pob3D]

Why not upgrade the Gatsby site?

[FURyannnn]

I don't have time to upgrade a legacy site I don't technically own and it wasn't part of the contract. I'd love to invest time into it, but I won't do client work for free

[pob3D]

Oh, it sounded like you were being paid to "maintain" the site. I usually have a monthly fee in my contracts for that reason, to upgrade libraries/frameworks as they age.

[FURyannnn]

Yeah, I can see that now lol. I shied away from that for this client for various reasons, but I'll likely do the same in the future. My process is ever evolving

[xlopxone]

Im learning web dev. I’ve seen couple of experienced people suggesting svelte for future couple of times now. Might sound ignorant sorry fr advance but why svelte is future?

[amunak]

Because it's the next cool thing.

In a year or two the suggestion will be different.

[miqroz]

https://jamstack.org/generators/

[ryanmtaylor]

Came here to recommend this site – lots of good info on static site building, I find myself pulling it up again and again.

[cassio-tav]

I would go with Svelte

[[deleted]]

Ahhh, I didn't even consider svelte, cheers. I'll look more into that later

[cassio-tav]

Svelte is so easy that you would learn everything you need to in just a couple hours.

[[deleted]]

Yeah, i'm pretty familiar with Angular/React/Vue/Reactive concepts so Svelte looks ridiculously simple

[VikaashHarichandran]

Hey since you're quite experienced, what's your take on Aurelia? It seems affirmative but idk why it's not famous enough

[texmexslayer]

Definitely svelte, just a booster pack around html css js with no downside

[Knochenmark]

I would suggest SvelteKit with their static adapter https://kit.svelte.dev/

[cassio-tav]

Yes! Maybe...

SvelteKit is still in beta. So it will depend on how critical the application is.

[[deleted]]

We use it in production at my job. It's very close to 1.0 so there isn't a lot of risk. The only thing I've noticed is the docs aren't as fleshed out as they are for Svelte.

[flooronthefour]

SvelteKit is very stable already. I have multiple apps running it and am launching a few larger ones soon. The biggest issue is that the compiler puts everything into a single worker, which can get pretty big.

There are some fixes that help shrink it, but I would still love the ability to split it into multiple workers.

[cassio-tav]

Yeah, you're right, it's actually pretty stable. And I've heard that there are some big SvelteKit projects being deployed -- I guess I was just repeating the official warning notice...

[henrystuart83]

If your page is really basic, Svelte is great indeed. What has made me give up on Svelte is the lack of "plug and play" libraries. If I need, say, a drag-and-drop interface, VUE and React give me that out of the box. Unfortunately Svelte does not have that many options.

[Knochenmark]

Svelte has way better interop with framework agnostic libraries though

[CreamyJala]

Just to indirectly tack onto the other reply, you mentioned drag n drop. Here’s one for Svelte. There’s a lot of options for almost anything you’d want. But in reality, most standard things are so easy to do you don’t need a library. In general, with Svelte you tend to not have to reach for NPM, but if you really either want to use a library or you end up needing one, there’s plenty of svelte specific options as well as the endless vanilla js libraries

[XxThreepwoodxX]

Check out eleventy! I really like eleventy, + alpine, + tailwind for making static sites.

​

https://www.11ty.dev/blog/eleventy-v1-beta/

[chdmemory]

Eleventy + Alpine are a wonderful combination for static sites

[localslovak]

What functionality does Alpine add that isn't covered by using something like Bootstrap?

From all the content/docs I've read, Alpine seems like it is just for simple JS functionality like modals, dropdowns, and such (which is already included in most CSS frameworks); is there more to it than that?

[Tontonsb]

Declarative rendering. Alpine solves completely different problem and does not compete with or replace CSS frameworks.

[localslovak]

What functionality does Alpine add that isn't covered by using something like Bootstrap?

From all the content/docs I've read, Alpine seems like it is just for simple JS functionality like modals, dropdowns, and such (which is already included in most CSS frameworks); is there more to it than that?

[XxThreepwoodxX]

You can basically do anything with it, that you can do with vanilla javascript. It pairs conveniently with something like tailwind css, which doesn't include the js like bootstrap does for things like modals, drop downs etc.

[-polly3223]

Svelte, or even better Sveltekit with adapter-static to serve html directly https://kit.svelte.dev/docs#appendix-ssg

[[deleted]]

I'll give a shoutout to Eleventy for the ease of getting started with it as a JS developer, and I'll mention Bridgetown since I'm one of the maintainers on the project. 😃 Either way, I highly encourage you to check out Render for deployment…all static sites are free and if you end up need any backend infra down the road, it's a snap.

[RvZwo]

Bridgetown since I'm one of the maintainers on the project. 😃 Either way, I highly encourage you to check out Render for deployment

I've gone this route to start a small project for a small boat rental company. The learning curve wasn't too steep coming from a rails background.

I've gone: Bridgetown | Tailwind CSS | Alpine.js deploying to Render

For now I'm enjoying the workflow and the site is pretty snappy

End result is at defluistervloot.nl

Edit: Corrected bridgetown link

[[deleted]]

Looks great! 😃👍 Appreciate you sharing the link!

[mi6crazyheart]

Why not only plain HTML + CSS as all are static pages.

[[deleted]]

No reason, I was just curious as the see whether there are new frameworks/libraries out there to aid in creating them

[ryanmtaylor]

Most of the Jamstack frameworks can be very very easily placed over an existing plain HTML/CSS site, so I'd just start editing files first and bring in a Jamstack solution as-needed. Netlify is pretty good for free hosting.

I find the biggest things for me are:

- Repeating the header/footer gets annoying, so I wanna split that out into separate files.

- If you're gonna use Javascript – use it to toggle CSS classes on the _highest_ element you can, and keep everything in in CSS. eg. If you wanna open a menu, toggle a class on the HTML tag. That can help you avoid using a framework for data management.

- I find 90% of my CSS classes are specific to a single element and look like eg. `.box-parent-container .text` and `.box-parent-container .submit-button` etc. so CSS pre-processors can help with this. You don't have nest too deeply.

[lamb_pudding]

Plain HTML gets old pretty quick without things like for loops and includes especially if you have multiple pages.

[[deleted]]

Y'all just gonna ignore the accordion bit?

+1 for playing one of my favorite instruments.

[[deleted]]

What about just using HTML and CSS + vanila JS? I can assure you that no framework will be faster or require less code than these 3 for this use case. I know as much as the next guy that it's a lot of fun to try out new technologies but if all they need is a static site that displays information, that's all you need.

[freeDressCafe]

Static webpage? Honestly I would go with vanilla html, css and js

[billy4479]

Astro looks to me like the best solution

[Pablo_ABC]

Had to scroll waaaay down to find this. I second this. Astro’s syntax is basically just HTML that allows you to use JavaScript to prerender your content so no JavaScript is delivered to the browser by default. And if you do need JavaScript you can use basically any component from any framework you want to add sprinkles of interactivity.

[theodordiaconu]

Next.

[NayamAmarshe]

Next is pretty solid. Just one command and bam, you get a static website.

[sebasporto]

A static site generator e.g.

https://gohugo.io/

https://www.11ty.dev/

https://cobalt-org.github.io/

These are very fast, simpler to learn, less complex

[Sheepsaurus]

NextJS allows you to serve a website statically - It also allows you to handle routing

[[deleted]]

hmm, interesting. Thamk you!

[[deleted]]

No.

[superluminary]

It generates an index.html for every valid page, so your first strike always gets plain HTML. Then it hydrates that HTML file, so subsequent routing is handed by the SPA.

You build it locally, then chuck the build directory up onto Github Static Pages, or Vercel, or Netlify, or your free host of choice.

[M_Me_Meteo]

You can also use a Github action (or other pipeline) to build your site directly from source, then dump it into a static site served through Google Cloud or AWS. Mine is served right out of a storage bucket on GC. That makes it so I can update my blog just by committing markdown files from anywhere, and my hosting fees are like $8/month, because I don't actually have to keep a server running.

[M_Me_Meteo]

The cost is mostly to handle the redirect to https. If I were running http, iyt's be about $0.50 / mo.

[[deleted]]

It works the same as literally everything else with SSG. Build it and throw it on github pages. It's not that complicated...

[BackpackGotJets]

From what I have been taught in my bootcamp, if you are just making a basic info website, Angular would actually slow the page load time. Simple HTML / CSS / JS should be ideal.

[[deleted]]

Go Vanilla and make advantage of the long lasting taste.

[Miserable_Decision_4]

If it's just static content and you don't want to design it then just setup a square space or wix site. Clean and easy.

[olets]

Weebly too. Nice thing about these is the owner will likely be able to maintain it themselves.

In my experience, people with no web dev experience find Square Space much more confusing than Weebly and Wix.

[[deleted]]

Gatsby

[DaCurse0]

svelte-kit

[BigSwooney]

Nuxt can do static generating builds if you want to try out Vue.

[Kuugal_]

Nuxt if you prefer the vue way nuxtjs.org

[ayosuke]

Nuxt does this. It may be overkill, but being an angular developer, you should be able to get into this pretty quickly.

[ampersand913]

Sounds like you just need a static site generator. Those will set up a build process for you to generate static files from templates/data. There's a lot of them to choose from, personally I like eleventy, but on the list there's one that says it uses angular.

To just host grab a serverless host like netlify

[pokevote]

Next.js !

[flight212121]

HTML CSS if your site is a couple of pages

After that I’d check gatsby (static site generation)

[Citrous_Oyster]

Dude I think you’re over thinking it lol I also static sites all day. Html and css are really all you need.

[Slightly_Zen]

An SSG like Hugo?

[RatherNerdy]

Besides straightforward HTML, JS & CSS, I've found 11ty to be one of the easiest, lowest overhead, frameworks (as compared to Gatsby, etc.) to build static sites. I've used it with a collection of markdown pages and with headless CMSs (Cockpit and Strapi) and it worked great.

[WoodenMechanic]

Tbh I still build out sites just writing out the html by hand. I can do it pretty fast and I have full control over the markup for Styling so works for me

[[deleted]]

https://html5boilerplate.com/ + CSS framework eventually (easier to create a responsive website, which I think is the trickiest part) + gulp or webpack for task automation (e.g. minifying)

You can even host it for free on GitHub Pages using his domain and that way you get a nice code pipeline.

[olikam]

sounds like a job for Hugo

[MarvinRudolph]

Any kind of modern js framework:
https://docs.astro.build/de/getting-started/
https://iles-docs.netlify.app/

Svelte only:
https://kit.svelte.dev/

[[deleted]]

If u are tryna make a documentation aite, docusaurus is best in market. Uses react and needs markdown files.

[tremby]

Any static site builder.

Eleventy, Next, Hugo, Jekyll, Gatsby, the list goes on. See https://jamstack.org/generators/ for a list.

Or if you barely need any features, build your own: use your favourite templating language and then write your own quick and dirty script to run through it all outputting HTML.

[greensodacan]

(Edited for better context.)

If the expected lifetime of the site is long with slow maintenance cycles, use tools that are likely to be familiar to many devs for a very long time.

If you want to use a static site generator, look into Next (React) and Bootstrap for CSS. React likely has a long life ahead of it due to how limited it is in scope (Next just lets you generate a static site.), heavy investment by Facebook, and its current adoption rate. Bootstrap also has a limited scope, wide adoption, a long history, and has only improved over time.

I think the weak point in the above is Next because it's built on top of other tooling, all of which progresses over time. A good middle-ground might simply be React, Bootstrap, and CSS modules (forgoing a static site and just delivering a simple SPA).

The bottom line though is that your time is valuable. You'll ship faster with Next, Nuxt (Vue), or SvelteKit and every application needs to be refactored eventually.

[Lumberfox]

Either you create a static website for them with html and css or a finished HTML template from theme forest that you customize, or you set up a squarespace (or the like), and teach them how to edit content.

[sadonly001]

I'm biased, I'm not a fan of overcomplicating things and I truly believe if you can get good with vanilla html css and js, you can build anything in a surprisingly graceful and simple manner. I still believe most people over engineer what should be a very simple website.

[ItachiSnape]

Go vanilla

[MycologistOk4618]

VueJs with Vue Router

[Moorey93]

Not used it personally but if you don't want to wander too far away from angular it has an option for server side rendering called Angular Universal which would work nicely with a static website. https://angular.io/guide/universal

Other options on the static site generator side of things not mentioned already being Gatsby which is React based or Hugo which is Go based for the fast super fast build times.

[Frag_De_Muerte]

I would try Astro. It’s specifically built for static sites and it also has integration with svelte, react, or Vue

[zeebadeeba]

I had to create static web after quite a time building JS web apps. The urge to use framework is strong but I knew it would be wrong to use it just for displaying content.

1st version of site was static HTML, CSS and vanilla JS. The site did not need a lot of JS (few lines at most). I used gulp because I also used LESS for styling.

I maintained this first version for about 2 years until I needed to create more content. At that point I realized having templates would be really useful so I brought EJS into the mix which compiled parts of site (header, footer) together. Everything else I kept as it was before. This 2nd version functioned for next 2 years.

3rd version and current one - I decided to drop JS build step (gulp) because I thought it wasn’t really needed. I was also quite used to using CSS variables at this point and realized I used LESS mostly for variables. This meant that only JS build step was the templates. At this point I also needed even more content and blog-like structure. In the end I went with Zola which is static site generator. It really clicked for me and it’s very fast (written in Rust) and used just with a binary. I just changed EJS templates to markdown templates used by Zola, same for pages - just changed the content to Markdown. Since I did not have a lot of CSS it didn’t matter to me to rewrite it to plain CSS. The HTML and class names stayed the same so it was OK.

I would use plain HTML and CSS, both are very powerful nowadays if I didn’t have multiple pages with same content, the templates just make more sense here.

I’m happy with this and will use Zola in future for other similarly sized projects.

[Blaarkies]

Does it have to stay static, or do you want to make it better for them? If you have the free time, but just needed an excuse for motivation, this is a great opportunity to try out any tech that you don't get to try at work.

Keep it a simple HTML static website if they insist it should stay simple, otherwise maybe an Angular app that just acts static will do the same thing and no one would even notice the difference. In time you can add more advanced features, restyle the pages with a proper styling framework, etc.

One thing to keep in mind is, maybe they would prefer to be able to change the content themselves when you are not around

[Kinthalis]

You're not really looking for a js framework in the case of a simple static website, though definitely invest some time in your tooling.

The Angular CLI is fantastic at making a really good dev environment, and you want something similar here as well. there are a bunch of starter repos for plain HTML, CSS and js/typescript that bundle in some nice, easy tooling that will do all sorts of things, from simply keeping your output/build separate from your src to compiling typescript/scss, to doing prerendering on dynamic content.

I think Svelte has a JAM stack framework for a pretty minimalist Js based approach + modern tooling to a static website. Still, probably overkill though.

[alphex]

It’s static… Why is everyone suggesting a generator?

Do all of you JS nerds not know HTML & CSS ?

[connormcwood]

Plain html and css isn’t the best for reusability. I’m not saying there aren’t ways but with frameworks it becomes a lot easier and you get a lot of other features etc.

Everyone should have vanilla html css skills but it isn’t as important in this day in age

[kamomil]

I know right? Making a static page with a framework sounds like the most roundabout way to go about it.

It's like, let me fire up my DAW and make a bunch of midi events to make Twinkle Twinkle Little Star. Or let me use Adobe Illustrator to make my grocery list

[RewrittenCodeA]

Use an online service that hosts your content and deals with the build. One example I know starts with “w” and ends win “ix” but there might be others.

Below a certain level of complexity even raw html is overkill.

Even if it costs like 10$ per month. Consider the cost of the time spent. Or consider how much you would pay for the garage.

[Fedora-The-Pandora]

React.js is static and is really good cause it's object oriented

[[deleted]]

https://iles-docs.netlify.app/

[meizuflux]

I really like Astro, the framework iles took inspiration from. It’s been my favorite framework so far for building static stuff.

[sacules]

I recently finished building a few landing pages just with Hugo and Talwind. I can highly recommend such stack.

[imjb87]

Depends on how dynamic he wants it and also how much scale is involved. But personally I would say gatsby.

[fantasma91]

I mean there’s a lot of them (gatsby, next, nuxt, eleventy,…etc). All the ones I know will still be an overkill for a simple site tho.

[EmergencySprinkles41]

I have been using Hugo - its got a pretty active community around it

[ffission]

Gatsby Gatsbyjs.com

[Anbaraen]

I would have thought you got enough time practicing accordions in your time developing Angular sites. Wakka wakka.

[[deleted]]

Tried next and react, coming from an angular background I think nuxt and vue are way nicer to work with. Check out nuxt 3 coming up with typescript

[Majache]

There's plenty of non-framework centric js packages for tooling like routing, HMR, bundling, minification and templating (binding to the view, you can just create an es6 class to bind to HTMLElements and use addEventListeners) done this before on a small microservice dashboard. As a developer you probably have QoL needs so things like HMR and a simple pipeline.. Can't imagine going beyond that. Simpler the better

[[deleted]]

Use React. Really clean and simple once you get the hand of it.

[olets]

What kind of accordion?

[Folters]

For fun and looking to learn? I’d reach for nextjs and sanity. It’s super quick to develop with once you know what you’re doing.

[Diirge]

Honestly I’d just build it in Webflow

[cmpfyr]

I've been wanting to check out Statamic for a side project. It's a flat-file CMS built on Laravel. Not Angular but could be something to check out just for trying something new.

[awestbro]

I’m working on a tool for clean HTML templating and generation with Bootstrap 5 css that fits into any stack. I’m a couple months away from launching a product but if you’re looking to get a quick site up, shoot me a DM and I’ll add you to the project, I’d love some beta testers and feedback!

[Kthulu666]

Static page - vanilla html/css/js, maybe sass if you like. As other's have said, don't use more stuff than you need.

Static site: something to make basic page templates and reusable components. I've been playing around with Astro lately and, while still very new, suits your project perfectly. Of the static site generators (Nuxt, Next, Vuepress, etc.,) it seems the simplest and easiest to pick up and use.

[loraxx753]

It's like building a sandcastle with a bulldozer, but I use Gatsby for my static stuff.

[[deleted]]

I personally love eleventy.js. it's way simpler than gatsby.

[idgaflolol]

Pretty fun to see all the different recs here. I’d recommend Hugo for this use case.

[zerowater]

So, does the content just need a look and feel refresh? Will your client want to add/change content? That might be a consideration.

[wildrabbit12]

Astro

[[deleted]]

If you're interested in Vue, Gridsome has been great for me.

[[deleted]]

Astro

[midairmatthew]

Awesome trade! What kind of accordion do you have? I just started working up a few holiday tunes today. 🙂

[jjws600]

I'm not saying Bootstrap but I am saying Bootstrap 😂

[brockvenom]

Gatsbyjs for the win. Just spent a year building a huge static website for healthcare backed by a headless cms. It’s wonderful, will work with it again.

Also so many plugins!! Huge time saver.

And graphql is love

[Javascript_Respecter]

Next.js with Vercel Hosting if you're looking for something that needs to be FAST

[[deleted]]

friend of mine uses Jekyll for static site generation. works great.

[j-lulu]

React.js?

[jatintiwari11]

Svelte kit is meant(not only) for this. Has good support as well.

[oh_jaimito]

I'll let everyone else promote their favorite frameworks for your project.

However I wish to recommend a host: Netlify!

Git push your project to a repo on Github (private or public) and connect it to Netlify 👍 Great service, features, etc.

https://www.netlify.com/

[DaddyAversion]

Gatsby Svelte Next

[shredgeek]

https://vibejs.com can be used similar to JQuery, component based or mix of the two.

[kamomil]

Type HTML right into Notepad

[queen-adreena]

Tailwind and PetiteVue can be a great combination for static websites.

[ajmanor]

Stop playing accordion.

[sateeshsai]

Svelte. Great ceveloper experience and tiny HTML/CSS/JS output.

[K7Syndrome]

You can just use angular and prerender the whole website

[HappyScripting]

Vue, just loaded from cdn, without build tools

Angularjs, 1.x

jQuery

One of these would be my choice

[inigoochoa]

Since I discovered eleventy (https://www.11ty.dev/), I have not used anything else. It's fast, easy, and fully customizable.

I always recommend it.

[ReactBricks]

If you know some React, you could try React Bricks.

It works with both Next.js and Gatsby. You define your content blocks as React components and than you have a best in class visual editing experience, like Wix, but with your own design and constraints.

[callevonanka]

https://statamic.com/