.github | ||
ci | ||
completions | ||
components | ||
docs | ||
src | ||
sublime_syntaxes | ||
sublime_themes | ||
test_site | ||
test_site_i18n | ||
.editorconfig | ||
.gitignore | ||
.gitmodules | ||
.travis.yml | ||
appveyor.yml | ||
build.rs | ||
Cargo.lock | ||
Cargo.toml | ||
CHANGELOG.md | ||
CONTRIBUTING.md | ||
EXAMPLES.md | ||
is-ehh.svg | ||
is-no.svg | ||
is-yes.svg | ||
LICENSE | ||
netlify.toml | ||
README.md | ||
rustfmt.toml | ||
snapcraft.yaml |
zola (né Gutenberg)
A fast static site generator in a single binary with everything built-in.
Documentation is available on its site or
in the docs/content
folder of the repository and the community can use its forum.
Comparisons with other static site generators
Supported content formats
- Zola: markdown
- Cobalt: markdown
- Hugo: markdown, asciidoc, org-mode
- Pelican: reStructuredText, markdown, asciidoc, org-mode, whatever-you-want
Template engine explanation
Cobalt gets because, while based on Liquid, the Rust library doesn't implement all its features, and there is no documentation on what is and isn't implemented; the errors are cryptic; and Liquid itself is not powerful enough to do some of things you can do in Jinja2, Go templates, or Tera.
Hugo gets because while it is probably the most powerful template engine in the list, after Jinja2, it personally drives me insane, to the point of writing my own template engine and static site generator. Yes, this is a bit biased.
Pelican notes
Many features of Pelican are coming from plugins, which might be tricky to use because of version mismatch or lacking documentation. Netlify supports Python and Pipenv but you still need to install your dependencies manually.