Hacker News Reader

Comment by gbuk2013 | Hacker News Reader

gbuk2013

Simply because it is very limiting. Running your own site, even on cheap shared hosting, opens up lots of exciting possibilities. With a bit of PHP and SQLite you can build lots of cool stuff (just like before WordPress came and made everything boring).

For simple sites, static is great, but if it becomes more complex (even just lots of pages sort of complex) then some sort of templating, even just through basic PHP includes, becomes very helpful to keep it maintainable. Example: I help look after a site with 3K static HTML pages and it is impossible to make any global changes without literally months of manual work. :(

For my own site I use a static site generator, which is another great option, but that comes with a much steeper learning curve unfortunately.

View on HN

Sorry for the pun here, heh but:

Simply because it is very limiting.

Seems like a limited/narrow definition of maintaining a website, just because there are different options of platforms and tools used to put content in the user's browser. Ultimately, for the browser, the result is the same, no?

Edit:

Following your edit, I can see an argument being made that maintaining static sites coming with a different workflow than maintaining a CMS and why some may not prefer it --personally, the mutability of the workflow for many of these stacks is the appeal of SSGs for me (especially, more recently 11ty[1] which I'm thinking of porting my personal site to).

[1] https://www.11ty.io/

My advice is based on my own experience, so obviously I think it is true.

It is my job to know a LOT about putting content in users browsers (from TCP protocol level up to the HTML) but I still think that GitHub pages is too limited for anything but very simple site.

It’s cool to have a static site - it’s not cool to be forced to only have a static site.

I still think that GitHub pages is too limited for anything but very simple site

Oh we wont disagree there, it absolutely has its limitations.

You had originally stated you don't consider these types of stacks to be "running my own site" and I was just wondering what the distinction was, not to necessarily call into question or invalidate your own experiences-if I gave that impression, it's on me to communicate myself a bit better next time.

You can still call APIs with a static site and do quite a bit in the browser.

I'm enjoying Netlify as a intermediate step: mostly static site, plus their Forms and Functions to add small interactive parts. I'm not sure it's easier for a beginner, though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com