Based on our record, Jekyll seems to be a lot more popular than Sitecake. While we know about 180 links to Jekyll, we've tracked only 5 mentions of Sitecake. 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.
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 2 months 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 / 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 / 3 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
Use something like this? CMS that generates static html? https://sitecake.com/. - Source: Hacker News / about 1 year ago
I think that user experience of website builders with wysiwyg and drag and drop UX won over time. Then, as time passed by, website builders become bloated and complex. Once again you needed a professional to maintain your site in site builder. So now simple solutions, static HTML, free or one-time fee CMSs are sexy again. (economy is not good, who wants another subscription?) I know because 14 years ago we have... - Source: Hacker News / almost 2 years ago
Https://sitecake.com/ works with simple html and PHP sites.... Veeeerrrry simple for client edits. Source: over 2 years ago
May be a suitable use case for https://sitecake.com/. Source: over 2 years ago
Other than that: Inline Editing CMS examples: Coast CMS, all you need to do is make the html editable with some classes and you're done. The CMS is kind of outdated though. Other examples: simplyedit.io, surrealcms.com, jocms.net, inlinecms.com, sitecake.com. Source: about 3 years ago
Hugo - Hugo is a general-purpose website framework for generating static web pages.
ClassicPress - The WordPress fork. No Gutenberg. Great future!
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.
TYPO3 - TYPO3.com - Infos, SLAs, Extended Support Versions and more
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.
Flextype - Flat-file content management system in PHP