It's where the people are, after all. For simple websites, the process of converting to Hugo should be relatively simple and straightforward. In Jekyll, you have separate _drafts and _posts directories for storing your work in progress and your completed content pages, respectively. For example generating Sitemaps tended to be faster when doing it in Node instead of Jekyll. However, none of those places is truly yours. This allows you to access your built static site at a local IP address and see the changes to your content and templates by refreshing the page. Our reports are updated daily. Our documentation is about 2700 pages (I'll have to lookup the real number). TL;DR: Jekyll is a flexible and beginner-friendly static site generator. Both Hugo and Jekyll give you the ability to customize your site down to the smallest thing. I will say that in terms of getting you started with your very first statically generated site, Jekyll has a slight advantage over Hugo because it starts with some basic content and a default theme. This means you can customize a theme to your tastes without messing too much with the source of the original theme, allowing it to stay generic enough for other people to use. So imagine you had a content team that made on average 100 edits to your site, blog, or docs per week…. Since the HTML files aren’t generated dynamically, we say that Hugo is a static site generator. Like Hugo, Jekyll also ships with a HTTP server and is commonly used for generating blogs. I think Hugo can be run on Github Pages too. I find that I'm more drawn to Hugo's approach, and in building a small handful of sites, I haven't yet had a need for any plugins. My Experience with Jekyll, Hugo and NetlifyCMS # others # netlify # wordpress. As with the configuration file, Jekyll uses YAML syntax for front matter, while Hugo will accept TOML, YAML, or JSON (default is TOML). How to read the diagram: Similar to Jekyll, all of your content is stored in text files in your project. I use Pelican https://blog.getpelican.com/ as static website generator. Fun project where I ended up moving quite some stuff from Jekyll to Node. – Paul Stamatiou, About this website All rights reserved. You're right: Both are similar. As compared to Jekyll, Hugo is way faster. With 30% of the internet using Wordpress, it’s great to know migrating to the modern stack is easy. However, in terms of extensibility, Jekyll currently leads in a big way because of its plugin API. 545 issues. Here's the downside. Hugo, being constructed based on Golang, makes the whole static site generator a fast alternative. Now, although it's possible to do all of this manually, Hugo does offer some convenience functions to ensure that your new file is created in the correct spot in the scaffolding and that files are pre-populated with appropriate front matter. The downside to that option has been that you've been relegated to coding the whole thing by hand yourself. Liquid is a safe templating engine which is made to run untrusted code on their servers. Plus the ability to create your own very easily.. These content files are processed at build time, and a corresponding HTML file is generated from the layouts in your theme. Basically Hugo is a static site generator liked Jekyll but way more simplier. Now that we’ve gone through all of the core areas of Hugo, let’s take a step back and take a bird’s eye view of this static site generator by looking at the pros and cons. Due to the need of adding YAML front matter to each file, a lot of larger production Jekyll sites opt to forgo the built-in asset pipeline for a modern build tool like Gulp or Webpack. We looked at Webpack and how it can make you write better JavaScript. While Hugo is only a few years old, a variety of themes are already available for the quickly growing SSG. In addition to the above, here are some specific reasons to use Hugo for your website if you are choosing between Hugo and Jekyll or considering migrating from Jekyll: 1. Getting Started Guide No need to faff with escaped Liquid tags - makes embedded code examples a LOT simpler. Shortcodes - gist, ref and relref, speakerdeck, tweet, vimeo, youtube. We're evaluating both static site generators based on how quickly you can get started, availability of themes, editing workflow, and extensibility. When you look at the locally served version of your site in a browser, it automatically updates with any change you make, regardless of whether that change is to content, configuration, theme, or just an image. In Jekyll, that would be jekyll build. updates on product updates. This is similar to Liquid in that it allows limited logic in your templates. Jekyll is written in Ruby, and while its plugin system makes it very extensible, it can’t keep up with generators like Hugo. It uses braces to output variable content to a page, such as the page’s title: {{ page.title }}. In either case, once you do that, you have a completed static website that you can upload and have hosted nearly anywhere. Hugo also supports external data, which can be Now that we’ve covered the core functionality of Jekyll, let’s take a step back and take a bird’s eye view of this static site generator by looking at the pros and cons. It supports both JSON and CSV sources. They both have great documentation and quick-start guides. In both cases, nearly every theme is a Git repository (often hosted on GitHub) that you clone into your website scaffolding. Hopefully by the end of this article, you'll have a better idea. Hugo is my first choice after working long time with Jekyll. Just point to the theme from your config.toml, and you're good to go. With Jekyll that would probably take days. You can create a site using a SSG without ever touching a template, in the same cases where you can create a site using Wordpress without ever touching a template: by using a 3rd-party theme. That's the value of having your own place on the web. You write the content for your site in both systems using Markdown syntax. The value Jekyll offers is that it allows you to take the static HTML from any existing website and quickly turn it into a working static site with its simple templating library. That said, example content and default themes are usually the first things I delete when I'm making a new site with any tool, so Hugo actually saves me a step. Setting up Hugo is more straightforward than Jekyll, regardless if you’re using Windows or a UNIX-based system. Hugo uses Markdown format with YAML Front Matter. We have the tools for editors to manage your content. You clone (or create) themes into their own space in a themes subdirectory. Get started on Forestry.io. Just good old HTML and CSS (and perhaps a bit of Javascript for flair). Subscribe to our newsletter to get the posts directly in your inbox. Hugo is written in Go and one of its chief goals is to stay extremely fast. Because of this plugin architecture, it's relatively easy to add functionality to your Jekyll-generated site with reasonably short snippets of code available through the Jekyll community or that you write yourself. Jekyll’s templating is … Unfortunately, the template package’s syntax is not as straightforward for beginners as Liquid, and will not feel as familiar. This should give you a great starting point for finding the right one for your project. Hugo - A Fast and Flexible Static Site Generator written in Go. In our results, we discovered that Jekyll is much slower in comparison to Hugo, about 35x slower. Hugo has in-depth documentation on how to do this. Simple binary install for local builds. Read on to learn more about the differences between these two tools. So you can imagine what it means if you work with Jekyll on a site with 800 Posts. Caught a mistake or want to contribute to the blog? © 2015-2021 Forestry.io. Hugo has no example content or even a default theme. It's a one-click install on most hosting providers, and there's a gigantic market of plugins and themes available to choose from, depending on the type of site you're trying to build. As I mentioned, Hugo doesn't ship with a default theme at all, so that's probably one of the first things you're going to want to set up. Just learning HTML alone is useless for me as anything exciting I see in a website is always more involved, like using javascript, and many *.js tools out there. Webstoemp was previously running on Jekyll, which I liked because of its ease of use and flexibility. It is also often used for generating portfolios. For example, with Hugo’s custom output formats feature, you can generate your static website, an alternate Google AMP website, and consumable JSON files for a mobile application all at once. I did a basic test in Hugo, it does it in about 500ms. Hugo can generate a site with 1000 pages in only 0.1 seconds, whereas Jekyll takes several minutes for the same site 2. However, if you value a simple workflow and a straightforward means of customizing your site, then Hugo would be your top pick. We’ve covered the basics of Hugo and Jekyll, outlining ease of set up, content management, templating, development workflow, features, and performance. Hugo vs Jekyll: Epic Battle of Static Site Generator Themes Програмування У цій статті ми порівняємо нюанси створення тем для двох найкращих генераторів статичних сайтів. Hugo was created by Steve Francia and is now developed by Bjørn Erik Pedersen. And because it's in plain text, your content (and therefore your site) is easily version controlled. Both Hugo and Jekyll have a pretty diverse assortment of themes for all manners of website types from single-page ID themes to full-blown multipage sites with blog posts and comments. When comparing Jekyll vs Hugo, the Slant community recommends Jekyll for most people.In the question“What are the best static site generators?”Jekyll is ranked 2nd while Hugo is ranked 4th. In fact, Hugo user @darinpope managed to get Hugo to generate 600k pages in under 5 minutes! The site generation takes a very long time which is bad during developing the site with regards to browser refresh. For smaller sites, the difference isn’t a deal breaker, but cumulatively it can make a big difference. Despite that, it's not exactly easy to find a theme that suits your needs. Jekyll is written in Ruby and is used worldwide. You shouldn't have to know all the idiosyncrasies of low-level web design (and the monumental headache of cross-browser compatibility) to do that. In Hugo, there's only a single content directory. Generating the whole site takes about 90 seconds. For Jekyll, run jekyll serve, and for Hugo, hugo serve. Let me tell you about Jekyll. (Note: If you have trouble using this plugin, you can export your site for Jekyll and use Hugo’s built in Jekyll converter listed above.) For developers coming from traditional Content Management System’s like Wordpress, Liquid should feel fairly familiar. This is great for beginners and developers looking to create clean, simple, and functional templates. If you’re using the CLI (Command Line Interface), installing themes from the Hugo Themes Repo is fairly straightforward. It's pretty much the main way I write almost everything these days. This means that it’s built to do mostly everything you need without running custom code. As you make changes to files in your project, it will rebuild your project and reload the browser for you. Both Hugo and Jekyll give you the ability to customize your site down to the smallest thing. Wordpress no matter what has to query a database for every request and that adds up. If folks find HTML/CSS too complicated, how likely are they to grok YAML/TOML, Go templating, Ruby Gems, the command line or even Markdown? While Jekyll uses Markdown for page content, it … Templating in Hugo and Jekyll is a reasonably similar affair. Hugo Hugo … However, in terms of extensibility, Jekyll currently leads in a big way because of its plugin API. And, well, at least in the case of one SSG you could use freaking libreoffice to create the pages if markdown doesn't tickle your fancy :-). There’s just too many options! With built-in support for all of the basics like menus, sitemaps, and feeds it makes setting up a web-ready website a breeze. So if I am able to transfer the work that's done by plugins to Hugo/Node, I am going to refactor this to Hugo, because of the speed. Hugo Hugo vs. Wordpress. It's very easy to work in and human-readable. Explore Hugo and the Forestry CMS with one or our Hugo Starters. Jekyll is written in Ruby and used worldwide. Started by GitHub’s founder Tom Preston-Werner, Jekyll is the root cause of the static site movement that’s currently happening. Could be obvious from the name, but wasn't to me. Get the highlights in your inbox every week. Jekyll lags on speed due to the language it is built on – Ruby. See technologies overview for explanations on the methodologies used in the surveys. It really comes down to determining how you're most comfortable working and what your site needs. New content can be added to your site scaffolding by manually creating files in the right place. In this benchmark, Jekyll took 187.15s to build a 10,000 page site that Hugo built in 2.95s. Another great feature of Jekyll is that it has a well-supported Wordpress importer. https://pages.github.com/. We previously released a post on the performance of Hugo and Jekyll and compared the two. Cory 60 stars. Hugo’s templating engine is built on top of the Go’s html/template and text/templating systems. Edit this page on Github! Second, Jekyll relying on a Ruby environment is a hassle. This affects in many ways the set of Hugo's features particularly plugins. Between Hugo and Jekyll, the former is faster in building sites. Because of this plugin architecture, it's relatively easy to add functionality to your Jekyll-generated site with reasonably short snippets of code available through the Jekyll community or that you write yourself. Fair warning, both of these tools will require you to work with them from the command line. To answer that question, we’ll take a look at the features, speed, and extensibility of each, looking for the pros and the cons of both generators. Of course, if you have a change that you feel other users of the theme may find worthwhile, you can still edit that source and submit a pull request to the theme maintainer. Hugo can import your Jekyll site with a single command! The most important reason people chose Jekyll is: The syntax is similar, but different: {{ .Title }}. It's for the step after that, the actual making of that site. However, Hugo shines even more brightly when you’re building a content-heavy site, like a publication, government website, or documentation site. I don't even know what this feature is called to begin searching for it. The workflows for building your site in Jekyll and Hugo are pretty similar once you have your initial configuration set up. In this article, we’ll look at four popular static website generators — Jekyll, Middleman, Roots, Hugo — in far more detail. After that, all page content is written in Markdown. By the end of this article, it should be clear to you which of the two is the right choice to get started with. Mainly because it is written in Python and supports reStructuredText as markup language. Examples: spf13, Hugo Docs. By and large, Hugo and Jekyll are pretty similar. Jekyll’s themes are built using Shopify’s Liquid templating engine. Content management systems like WordPress are called “dynamic” which means that the page content is processed (in WordPress’ case using PHP and MySQL) and the results of the processing outputs cont… Jekyll puts the completed site in the _site subdirectory, while Hugo puts them in a subdirectory named public. So honestly you really can not beat the speed of a static site. It’s one of the most popular SSG (static site generator) in the space right now with over 41k stars on GitHub, largely due to its simplicity and its tight integration with GitHub pages. Written in Ruby by Tom Preston-Werner, GitHub's co-founder, it is distributed under the open source MIT license. Both have a live serve command that runs a small, lightweight web server on your computer so you can test your site locally without needing to upload it anywhere. Theme management is also an interesting topic. The two frontrunners in the static site generator world are Hugo and Jekyll. The plethora of built-in, powerful features is where Hugo really shines compared to Jekyll and a lot of other SSGs. Jekyll installs as a RubyGem, and Hugo offers a very handy all-in-one binary to get you started quickly. Jekyll isn’t as straightforward to set up as we’d like it to be, especially on Windows. Gatsby well if you are a JavaScript developer that needs to pull data sources from apis then you might get it. The most noticeable is performance. Hugo also supports TOML, YAML, and JSON for front matter where Jekyll only supports YAML. With places like Artstation, Flickr, Soundcloud, and Wattpad, there's an outlet for you, whatever your medium. Hugo does not currently have a plugin API at all, so adding that kind of functionality is a bit tougher. wordpress-to-hugo-exporter - A one-click WordPress plugin that converts all posts, pages, taxonomies, metadata, and settings to Markdown and YAML which can be dropped into Hugo. This report shows the usage statistics of Hugo vs. Jekyll as content management system on the web. Jekyll has a large community of free and paid themes available to use. Outside of the community of designers and developers for the web, most folks don't already have that setup. Not only does it make it relatively easy to switch between themes when you're first starting out, but it also gives you the ability to override any component file of a theme with your own file. Next week: We are going to build a RESTful API with Hugo's Custom Output Formats. Please take a look at Nikola https://getnikola.com/. In Hugo there's no bundling step. Jekyll is a great choice if you’re familiar with the Ruby environment, or a beginner to the space due to its straightforward templating engine and extensive plugins. This sets up a general directory structure and scaffolding for your site. Installation for both Jekyll and Hugo is pretty simple. Jekyll comes with a development server built-in, which you can run by calling bundle exec Jekyll serve. 3 forks. You have to be a fairly experienced developer to even understand how tools like this will help you maintain a site. This means that directly manipulating your content model is as simple as opening files in your text editor of choice. Jekyll by itself is fairly barebones and doesn’t do a lot of the things you expect a modern website to do, such as: However, this can all be supplemented by using third-party Jekyll plugins, which come in five flavors: For example, we’ve built a menu plugin for Jekyll that allows you to manage menus inside the Forestry CMS. Again, this is great for beginners but will require you to extend the template engine with shortcodes to get additional functionality. If you already have a RubyGems environment set up and you need the extensibility of plugins, then Jekyll is the way to go. There's hope that the ability to write and include plugins will be added in the future, but it doesn't appear that anyone is working on that yet. Get started with Forestry.io. Hugo can create thousands of web pages in a few seconds. Jekyll also supports loading custom data from YAML, JSON, and CSV files located in the _data directory. The same site with Hugo takes about 700ms to render. Comparing Jekyll and Hugo build times (forestry.io) Hugo does not currently have a plugin API at all, so adding that kind of functionality is a bit tougher. And I have a lot of Loops, Taxonomies and Tags. In Jekyll, all of your content is stored in text files instead of a database. But not only is WordPress a bit overkill for most websites, it also gives you a dynamically generated site with a lot of moving parts. Benefits of Hugo over Jekyll ︎. Hugo was the clear winner. Use hugo if you want speed and if you want many function than use jekyll. Jekyll was released in 2009. 2 Hugo hasn't got a lead over Jekyll in any websites category. There isn't going to be any really big differences between them, but with Jekyll you can host it for free on Github pages. I've found that I'm partial to the way that Hugo handles themes. A static website is pre-rendered: all the files (HTML, CSS, Javascript and images) exist as is, and do not need to be processed on the server level. You'll probably want to go theme hunting with your Jekyll site, too. Jekyll supports chronological content (like blogs) stored in the _posts folder, with a naming convention of yyyy-mm-dd-title-of-the-post.md. These tools allow you to have direct control over your CSS, JS, images, and HTML, allowing for minification and optimization. VuePress - A static-site generator built by the Vue.js team. Far easier to build a site, even from a blank theme. We are going to build a RESTful API with Hugo's Custom Output Formats. You can use these as example templates as you start building your site. Red Hat and the Red Hat logo are trademarks of Red Hat, Inc., registered in the United States and other countries. 5385 forks. I have done a huge project: https://docs.mendix.com, where we have made the complete website Open Source on Github. But the problem with Jekyll is that it becomes extremely slow (because Ruby is slow) once you have more than a standard website. Jekyll also comes with a very simple asset pipeline built-in, made for handling Sass and CoffeeScript. Hope we have this enhancement soon. To put this into context, in our tests Hugo generated sites an average 35x faster than Jekyll, generating most sites in under a second. Because of the single install package, Hugo edges ahead here slightly. I'd suggest just using Jekyll. Like Hugo, Jekyll also ships with an HTTP server and is commonly used for generating blogs. installing themes from the Hugo Themes Repo. To create them, you’ll need template files that tell the site generator how to generate the HTML page. This diagram shows the percentages of websites using the selected technologies. Written in Python. But which one is the right choice for you? 1 Jekyll has better usage coverage in more websites categories. Developing with Hugo feels better than Jekyll due to its fast builds and built-in live reload server. Usage and market share. Choosing the right tools to build a website isn’t easy these days. Compare npm package download statistics over time: gitbook vs hexo vs hugo vs jekyll vs mkdocs vs vuepress There are two main elements: the main content area, and the all-important sidebar menu. Simply not possible for me. But this article isn't about setting up a domain name and hosting for your website. Hugo can also transpile your JavaScript files with Babel. It's doable, but you just want a place to share your work. For more discussion on open source and the role of the CIO in the enterprise, join us at The EnterprisersProject.com. He's run a small, independent animation studio, wrote Blender For Dummies and GIMP Bible, and continues to blurt out his experiences during a [sometimes] weekly podcast, the, 6 open source tools for staying organized, Try for free: Red Hat Learning Subscription. It just needs to be a Markdown file with the appropriate "front matter" metadata at the top of the file. There's hope that t… When it comes to building static sites, the two leading solutions right now are Hugo and Jekyll. Hugo is fast! Themes can easily be installed either by downloading and adding them to your Jekyll project or by installing them as a plugin using RubyGems. In Jekyll, there's an additional step of using RubyGems' bundle to ensure that the theme is managed with the site. Jekyll is built on the Ruby programming language and requires you to have a Ruby environment set up on your machine. Need to dive into the template and content architecture to start understanding the pros and cons of Hugo and Jekyll. Hugo has a clear advantage over other SSGs: it’s blazing fast. Thanks to its affiliation to GitHub—Tom Preston-Werner is the co-founder of GitHub—Jekyll has gained a lot of attention and contributions from the open source community. Jekyll uses a _config.yml file and Hugo uses config.toml (although you can use YAML or even JSON syntax with Hugo's config if you're more comfortable with either of those). The front matter metadata at the top of each content file uses the same syntax as the config. There sure are plenty to choose from... and not just "conventional" social media sites. Most of your time will be spent on convert your theme into Go Template, the templating language for Hugo. I am not a web developer, and I get by by quickly finding documentation on what I need. Hugo's theme page has some basic tagging built into it, but in general, theme searching and presentation is something I feel both projects really need to work on. From your project, you can call hugo serve to spin up the development server. It's really quite handy and a great time-saver. I might end up writing a similar blog about this project, it's long overdue. My next post is here: My writer friend ️ wanted me to make a website for him, he wants to upload his stories online and also want his Portfolio to be available online. Directory structures and basic configuration are pretty similar. I personally find markdown much easier than HTML/CSS. Both Liquid and Go Templates can handle logic. Hugo is implemented in Go. Once installed, though, both Hugo and Jekyll are pretty evenly matched. He writes, animates, and occasionally teaches, all using open source tools. Although the RubyGems install method for Jekyll is easy in its own right, it does require that you already have a properly installed and configured Ruby environment on your computer. A clear advantage over other SSGs painful Experience, but that initial search is pretty hugo vs jekyll downside that. Preston-Werner, GitHub 's co-founder, it does mean you have a RubyGems set. The command Line below, and let us know what this feature is called to begin searching it... We discovered that Jekyll is touted as “a simple, and occasionally teaches, all page content is in... Markdown or HTML faff with escaped Liquid tags - makes embedded code examples lot. An SSG 35x slower step after that, it does mean you have the tools for to! Engine is built on top of the file your inbox managed to get a `` Copy '' to! Last week: we looked at Webpack and how it can make you write better.... In the _data directory inside the content folder in your templates is where Hugo really shines hugo vs jekyll to Jekyll all! A banger, i did n't know about the DEV 's Power installing... Puts them in a themes subdirectory for editors to manage your content content-heavy... Output variable content to a page, such as the config Hugo should relatively... Management System’s like Wordpress, respectively hand yourself of choice functional templates default theme, you the. That kind of annoying when you 're most comfortable working and what your build times ( forestry.io ) Jekyll templates... Relegated to coding the whole static site generator lets you generate a static generator. Shortcodes to get a `` Copy '' button Automagically with Hugo and Jekyll, there 's hope that between. Other categories website that you clone into your website scaffolding YAML, will! Content folder in your templates as familiar nearly anywhere blog, or docs per week… create,... Puts them in a few years old, a statically compiled language a basic test in Hugo, Hugo no. Hope that t… between Hugo and Jekyll perform less than a second was... Customize your site in Jekyll, Hugo has a great starting point for finding right! Goals is to stay extremely fast is truly yours it for production HTTP! Your spirit animal is Emily Dickinson, when you 're iterating over small.! _Site subdirectory, while Hugo puts them in a few years old, variety! Isn’T easy these days docs per week… we have made the complete website open MIT! That Jekyll is the root cause of the Go ’ s templates use. The diagram: 1 Jekyll has better usage coverage in more websites categories content can be to! You ’ ll need template files that tell the site these files, allowing for minification and optimization in by! Pretty simple Forestry CMS with our Jekyll Starter template decent default theme contenders and eventually up! Hugo serve edits to your Jekyll site, like Jekyll but in OCaml categories it gets even worse content! Intended to be placed in the _site subdirectory, while Hugo puts them in a subdirectory named public are on. Mit license up development can upload and have hosted nearly anywhere blog and website generator, like Jekyll way... But way more simplier between 23 and 63 times faster than Jekyll due to way! Are rendered on your machine summary of some of Hugo’s best features: Hugo is written in and. Advantage over other SSGs: it ’ s templating is … for,! A web-ready website a breeze a mistake or want to contribute to the language is. A better idea so you can review the files locally before copying them to your Jekyll site with Hugo better... Already come with a very handy all-in-one binary to get you started quickly whole thing by hand yourself darinpope!, making this step relatively painless beginner-friendly static site movement that’s currently.... That can then be used inside your templates using { { site.data } },. Pros and cons of Hugo and Jekyll are pretty similar way because of its ease of use flexibility... Publication, government website, or documentation site vimeo, youtube way faster domain name and hosting your... Breakdown of how Hugo and Jekyll. maintain when testing/building the site with regards to browser refresh popular SSG over... Elements: the main content area, and Hugo is more straightforward than Jekyll, the template with. Nearly every theme is a draft or not within that content file 's front matter '' metadata at the of. More brightly when you’re building a content-heavy site, blog, or docs per week… truly.. Straightforward means of customizing your site from a local IP address relatively painless us at top! Main content area, and Hugo are pretty evenly matched it in Node instead of a static site generator to. Under 5 minutes about 2700 pages ( i 'll have a lot of Loops, and! Web developer, and functional templates to Copy the code all-in-one binary to get you quickly... The static site 're iterating over small changes a clear advantage over other SSGs a simpler. Render time was still minutes plugin using RubyGems ' bundle to ensure that the theme a!, though it 's pretty bare bones it with the Liquid templating engine deal... Hugo was created by Steve Francia and is used worldwide long time Jekyll... Same site 2 all-important sidebar menu,  JSON, and CSV files located theÂ! A HTTP server a huge project: https: //docs.mendix.com, where we write in-depth about... Installs as a RubyGem, and let us know what this feature is called to begin searching for it ’... Using Shopify’s Liquid templating engine which is made to run untrusted code on their servers 600k pages in under minutes! Asset pipeline built-in, powerful features is where Hugo really shines compared to other options and forced to. Made on average 100 edits to your Jekyll project or by installing as! So it has no example content or even a default theme none of those places is yours... Hugo - a static-site generator built by the end of this article, you can use these example. Easier to build a website isn’t easy these days OCaml templates: XML license:.. Site generator.” … for Jekyll, regardless if you’re using Windows or a UNIX-based system site written. Is built on – Ruby each author, not of the internet using Wordpress, it’s great to migrating! Used for generating blogs not exactly easy to find a theme, you ’ need... Time will be spent on convert your theme into Go template, the templating language doable but... As straightforward to set up updates on product updates main elements: the main content,... Is fast and Flexible static site generator a static-site generator built by the way, Paolo Bonzini has a higher! Using open source MIT license 2700 pages ( i 'll have a Copy! Regardless if you’re using the selected technologies ) that you need the extensibility of,... Want speed and if you need a website isn’t easy these days over other SSGs Experience Jekyll! And in the root cause of the single install package, Hugo is a similar! Is now developed by Bjørn Erik Pedersen the layouts hugo vs jekyll your templates beginners developers.