Based on our record, Jekyll should be more popular than Hexo. It has been mentiond 180 times since March 2021. We are tracking product recommendations and mentions on various public social media platforms and blogs. They can help you identify which product is more popular and what people think of it.
There's also hexo [1]. I saw that on Matt Klein's website [2] and the theme looked pretty clean. [1] https://hexo.io [2] https://mattklein123.dev/2020/03/08/2020-03-07-new-website/. - Source: Hacker News / 3 months ago
In my case, the latter is not possible because this blog is a static site, generated via Hexo and hosted on GitHub. It simply lacks a modifiable active server component. - Source: dev.to / 5 months ago
Previously I've used Nuxt2 and even sooner - hexo.io. Source: over 1 year ago
To make their creation easier, numerous open-source static websites generators are available: Jekyll, Hugo, Gatsby, Hexo, etc. Most of the time, the content is managed through static (ideally Markdown) files or a Content API. Then, the generator requests the content, injects it in templates defined by the developer and generates a bunch of HTML files. - Source: dev.to / over 1 year ago
There are also many alternatives for selecting Static-Side Generating blog framework such as Hexo, Gatsby, Next.js (more details here). We will pick Hexo as our framework because it is a fast, simple & powerful blog framework. - Source: dev.to / almost 2 years ago
This blog is running on Hugo. It had previously been running on Jekyll. Both these SSGs ship with the ability to create excerpts from your markdown content in 1 line or thereabouts. - Source: dev.to / about 1 month ago
We also take a look into static site generators, covering Astro, Nuxt, Hugo, Gatsby, and Jekyll. We take a detailed look into their usability, performance, and community support. - Source: dev.to / about 2 months ago
In that case, what we need would be closer to a static site generator (like Gatsby, Hugo, Jekyll). But, static site generators aren't the best choice either because we would have to build a lot of documentation-focused functionality (like versioning, search, and code blocks) ourselves. - Source: dev.to / 2 months ago
In future, if you want to move from Jekyll to something else, you just have to worry about that `_posts` and `_assets` folder. They may have different naming convention but you can just config-managed it or change it to your choice. This is why I suggested owning that two yourself. You also may not worry about FrontMatter[3] (meta in the header) and its accompanying jazz by asking Jekyll to use the plugins... - Source: Hacker News / 3 months ago
As per many other comments, it sounds like a static site generator like Hugo (https://gohugo.io/) or Jekyll (https://jekyllrb.com/), hosted on GitHub Pages (https://pages.github.com/) or GitLab Pages (https://about.gitlab.com/stages-devops-lifecycle/pages/), would be a good match. If you set up GitHub Actions or GitLab CI/CD to do the build and deploy (see e.g.... - Source: Hacker News / 3 months ago
Hugo - Hugo is a general-purpose website framework for generating static web pages.
GatsbyJS - Blazing-fast static site generator for React
WordPress - WordPress is web software you can use to create a beautiful website or blog. We like to say that WordPress is both free and priceless at the same time.
Nikola - Nikola is s static site generator tool written in Python.
Ghost - Ghost is a fully open source, adaptable platform for building and running a modern online publication. We power blogs, magazines and journalists from Zappos to Sky News.
Wintersmith - Flexible, minimalistic, multi-platform static site generator built on top of node.js