Some of my own thoughts: while hugo is popular, I see some advantages in jbake:
* it is Java based, so we can easily debug it if necessary * it supports freemarker and asciidoc ootb, while hugo needs a separate asciidoc installation * jbake is also available via sdkman, which most of us use already. On the other hand: * probably short support tracks with yupiik minisite. * maven plugin, so we don't even need sdkman if you don't have it already. -- Ben Am Mo., 30. Aug. 2021 um 13:44 Uhr schrieb Benjamin Marwell <[email protected]>: > > Hello everyone! > > Every now and then we have a discussion about replacing the scms site > generator which we currently use with something more popular. > > There are three tools which came to our minds so far: > * hugo [1] > * jbake [2] > * yupiik minisite [3] > > "hugo" is by far the most popular one next to jekyll. jbake is > java-based, yupiik minisite is a tool by yupiik, the company Francois > and Romain lead / work for. > > Please reply with your opinions about the tools or any arguments > against a tool switch if you see the necessity to stay with scms. > > Ben > > [1] https://gohugo.io/ > [2] https://jbake.org/ > [3] https://github.com/yupiik/tools-maven-plugin
