i like to make websites and I've been slowly realizing that my requirements for making websites might be a little weird

@b0rk I love that your response to this is a simple Gist on GitHub. Not only do you prefer to use static sites, but "here is a static file to host my answer about static sites"... Very on brand.

@b0rk Good plan - so many of my write-and-forget tools have a "runme.sh" wrapper to encapsulate the PATH, venv, and whatever other requirements. It's good to have an obvious entry point.

@b0rk tech stack is very similar to mine, which must be why I agree with it.
except "try to avoid buying domains". I keep failing, pls help.

@kalfeher right now gandi.net is trying to charge me $50/year to renew a domain which is a big source of motivation to keep the number down

@b0rk I feel validated that I have landed on similar patterns. I'm a little more tolerant of a VPS but I am growing less patient with them.

@b0rk I’m a huge fan of GitHub’s scripts to tune them all pattern. I try to set them up in every project I join.

(Side Benefit of executable scripts like ./script/server, is that you can quietly upgrade them to a Perl/Ruby/whatever script without changing invocation command)

https://github.com/github/scripts-to-rule-them-all

@b0rk this resonates. Your github preferred tech stacks list makes perfect sense imo.

It’s impossible to productively use all the programming languages, hosting and service providers, and tech stacks so we have to pick based on what works for us in the moment and over time.

I try to be open to the new, but if something is too fiddly to setup or is inelegant then I think that it’s perfectly reasonable to just use what works.

@adamw @vathpela @b0rk
I've built projects where I had a README *and* a Makefile, but I still fumbled searching for the commands in my Bash history.

@badnetmask @adamw @vathpela @b0rk I like ‘just’ for this sort of thing. Just sayin’.

@b0rk
I ordered and paid for such a site recently. We're still out here

@b0rk I feel the same way. I endorse #Hugo for blogs, and for a simple wiki? #mkdocs

@b0rk I had this case lately where I wanted to hand over a static website to a client, fully expecting that I can show them an open source alternative of Dreamweaver, just to figure that none such projects are alive anymore.

So I produced a bookmarklet that let's them edit parts of the website inbrowser, download the updated document, and upload it via ftp.

Still better then attaching a cms I would do almost anything for low-effort webdev. And I believe folks should become aware of html as document again. I even checked if editing the website in Libre/OpenOffice would work out...

@b0rk

I made this super simple "template" system with awk to make it easier to maintain scanus.com eventually i put it on github

https://github.com/ggirton/insert-3-files

Last year i needed to remove several menu entries & it meant i didn't have to make the same edits 20 times!

@b0rk Sounds like work for static website generators like Hugo, McDocs, etc.

@b0rk This (the gist) all makes sense to me except that I don't think I understand the no-method-call restriction in Go's html/template system. The docs seem to suggest you can call methods (https://pkg.go.dev/text/template#:~:text=.Method,receiver%2C%20dot.Method().), so you and the docs must be talking about something slightly different but I'm not sure what that difference is.

@jpab thanks! honestly I think I just made a mistake, there is definitely something I really struggle with about Go templates but maybe that thing specifically is not what it is. i find it kind of hard to get a handle on