Hacker News Reader

Comment by michalskop | Hacker News Reader

Is using Hugo suitable even for non-tech people? I have worked with several systems during last years (Wordpress, Drupal, custom apps, several wikis), but I am still not happy with them, because of missing combination "easy to maintain" and "easy to use by non-tech people (when installed)". In my experience, non-tech people can use markdown (if properly motivated) at most and can log in into a system, but that is. Is Hugo going to help here?

View on HN

In my experience as a not-very-technical person who has worked with WordPress extensively and dabbled in static site generators, WordPress is an order of magnitude easier to deal with.

Further thoughts on this: https://poststatus.com/static-site-generators-versus-wordpre...

There are content-as-an-API services (e.g. Contentful, Prismic.io, CloudCMS) and some editors (e.g potion, Content Editor) to make managing markdown on GitHub easier. Either should help with non-tech people creating content.

Full disclosure: I work for Contentful.

There are some hurdles yet to be had for the non-tech person. But I would claim that when he/she gets the split panel up and running with the markdown editor on the left and the live-reloading browser on the right, it is no way going back to whatever Wordpress feeds you.

There are initiatives writing some nice clients on top of static site generators such as Hugo and Jekyll, but in my head you then lose out some of the most valuable features of Hugo, speed and simplicity.

I don't think most genuinely non-technical people would prefer Markdown over real WYSIWYG.

Try Lektor for running locally or Hubpress if you look for github based online generator.

you can use prose or netlify which has web-ui, or desktop Typora wysiwyg

Reply on news.ycombinator.com