Static Site Generators vs. Wordpress, continued…

Kai: experimented with Jekyll and Hugo

  • Can Hugo be extended?
  • Hugo provides short codes for easier development
  • Hugo is a simple system: single cross-platform executable
  • Jekyll may be more difficult to set up
  • Concerned with Ruby dependencies over the long term

Jon: building documentation site in Hugo

  • Hugo is simple
  • Is the new Jekyll system supported better?
  • Lector Python static site generator
  • has single executable
  • administrative interface in browser

Andrew: experimented with Jekyll

  • Jekyll is difficult to manage on local machines
  • easy to deploy a site with Github pages

Discussion

  • Need to be able to sync pages across multiple local systems
  • Work on shared repository, probably on Github
  • prose.io makes it easy to publish Markdown files to Github
  • Not many people will need edit access, most pages will stay static
  • How stable is the content, how much is there, and how often will it be updated?
  • There is a time limit to design and implement a new architecture: May 2017
  • Wordpress is easy to use, not necessarily the most important consideration for long term
  • Wordpress is the most accessible to a non-technical user
  • Possibility for a hybrid architecture?
  • static content over the long term in shared repository
  • dynamic content in Wordpress
  • Difficult to publish specifications in Wordpress
  • Versioning is a big advantage for static site generators hosted remotely
  • Technical debt may be resolved over the long term with good documentation
  • LRMI Wordpress is a front end for a triple store
  • Split makes it difficult to create a cohesive web presence
  • Need to develop a methodology for analyzing content and then choose a direction
  • Possible to integrate Github managed static sites through Wordpress
  • Systems must be managed by a staff position
  • montly stipend for infrastructure manager in discussion
  • volunteers can contribute as they will
  • Local systems require long term maintenance commitment and pose security issues
  • DCMI should downsize to reflect the current state of activity
  • Static site generators are a technical moving target
  • dependencies change and can break a site
  • best to choose a system with an active support community
  • single executable options (Hugo, Lector) are less likely to break
  • Documentation is a good fit for static pages and technically proficient personnel
  • Front page, newsy content is more dynamic and more likely to be maintained by less technically proficient personnel

Recommendations

  • Jon: static site generator needs to be very stable, Jekyll provides stability but ease of use is an issue, Lector might be a good system
  • Joachim: avoid Wordpress, has set up Drupal with all content local to avoid security issues, update migrations are a burden
  • Andrew: static site generators are great for a number of reasons, but they require a substantial technical investment in the system
  • Kai: Wordpress updates are generally painless and reliable, use Wordpress for daily activities for now and investigate ways to integrate static sites

Action Items

  • investigate how to incorporate static pages in Wordpress
  • experiment with shared git repository DCMI IAC Demo Site
  • continue looking into new systems