> Anyone who knows me well (in the tech industry at least) knows that I’m a major Hugo bigot
"Bigot" is likely not the word you are looking for here - it generally has the connotation of someone who looks down or discriminates against those they consider lesser, e.g. racists or sexists. Maybe "champion" or "fanatic"?
I think more in the sense of "I believe this is better regardless of objective reality". The others convey that you like or are into something, this conveys that you won't be swayed, so anyone reading further had better be ok with that.
I strongly disagree with this view. "You use JS anyway" is not a single valid reason to adopt React.
Use it when you build interactive web applications (because that's what it was developed for), or if your site uses heavy content-changing animations commonly used in SPAs. Documentations, on the other site, are neither of that. At least this is what I expect: I am searching for information because I have to solve a problem, not to look at nice animations or give the docs page a thumb up.
Thanks for the clarification. Based on the Gatsby website itself and the docs it seemed that the websites generated with it also use React for the site itself. Apparently this is not the case. Still, the argument that one should better not bet on heavy frameworks for simple documentation is kinda valid, even if not applicable for the given use case.
Why React? Because there's A LOT of developers familiar with it. Why Gatsby? Has a ton of plugins and starter kits. It's also super simple to use along with modern CMSes like Ghost, Netlify, Contentful, Tina, etc.
> That's what it was developed for
React's official website recommends using Gatsby if you're building a static website.
I like it, but would you consider toning the color scheme a little down? Or maybe be a bit more sparing with color? The massive field of bright pink smacked me in the eyes when I opened it up. A good documentation theme should get out of the way so the reader can focus on the text rather than the colors.
The browser does it natively if you hand code it into every page and every sub heading. What the tool does is allow you to insert the script into any page and it will automatically create anchors for all the sub headings. This saves tons of time because you don’t have to do it manually (i.e. by inserting IDs in every H1, H2, etc.)
Markdown parsers can auto-generate IDs for headers but they don't create a nice icon next when you hover over the header. That's what Anchor.js is for. For an example, see this page: https://kubernetescommunitydays.org/organizing.
I just configured VuePress ( https://vuepress.vuejs.org/ ) for our frontend project docs at work. Having statically built docs is great and having the ability to document your Vue code with Vue-enabled markdown is a great bonus.
I love Hugo. My personal blog and my tech blog are both built with Hugo, with an extremely simple AWS deployment pipeline. I’ve been looking for a great documentation theme , but I haven’t found one to my liking yet (closest is maybe hugo-theme-book or hugo-theme-docuapi). If v0.1 is out by end of 2019 I’d love to test drive it for a project I’m planning out early 2020.
An example of a (somewhat) similar type of static documentation site theme, but for Jekyll, is a project I’ve been participating in. Born primarily as a side effect of putting online the projects from Ribose Open, it’s somewhat idiosyncratic and (ironically) lacking its own site, but we’re getting there. It’s being actively dogdfooded.
This is an excellent idea. My workplaces have often used github or confluence for documentation, but they're slow, and offer limited customisation. Static site generators make a lot of sense for this use case.
I've seen this rule stated in various ways, but it seems to always be a fixed value, which presumably is derived specifically for the information-density of the English language. Is there a resource on what this number should be for other languages with different information densities? (I can't imagine that you should have 60 characters of Chinese per line, for example.)
Docsy doesn't break keyboard scrolling in Qutebrowser. Tract does not work for me at all. Also, while I'm sure it's configurable, the neon pink is burning my eyes in a dark room and constrasts terribly with bright white.
For a documentation thing like this, I’d generally recommend avoiding a separate scrolling pane for the primary content, but rather arranging so that it can use the document’s scrolling element. This gets the scrollbar in the place people generally expect it in web things, and makes it work regardless of whether the JS loads.
I don’t know of any good articles about the trade-offs of the various approaches, but I’ve started writing one myself. (I’m drafting a series on the intricacies of various UI patterns and their implementations, and this was actually already on my list.) Email me if you’d like me to drop you a line when I publish it (being realistic, expect to wait weeks for it).
That looks really nice! Recently had to create documentation for Prism OS (https://prismos.dev/docs) and I decided to use docusaurus since it seemed like the quickest way with sane defaults but it ended up taking way longer to setup everything before I could focus on writing the documentation. Is there a easy to use platform to quickly spin up documentation pages without coding ? That would also be really helpful since non technical support or content writing staff could then also contribute
A while ago I looked into all Hugo solutions for documentation and have to say this looks very clean and simple!
I'm still looking for something that let me define a top-root level index for documentation of several products (much like https://learn.adafruit.com/) but found none (also Jekyll-based). I rolled my own based on Hugo but my CSS-formatting and HTML-generating skills are those from a firmware developer :)
Not so easy for a casual user. Building a nice interactive dropdown search widget (or something of the sort) requires solid JS chops and you need to know your way around Hugo to generate a search index. But others have done it and there are some good tutorials out there, so by all means give it a shot!
I'm looking for something a bit more powerful than the Wiki bundled with GitLab (which uses Gollum). I started with MkDocs but moved it over to GitLab Wiki because I thought the instant feedback. I now have mixed feelings.
I've used Hugo in the past for a few sites, but the amount of boilerplate required, even though minimal, is a bit of a hurdle for an internal wiki.
Fuse.js works great and is client-side. Hugo can generate the necessary JSON outputs and there is documentation on how to set it up on their website. Please let me know if you come across anything better.
Docusaurus is a very nice tool but in my extensive experience React-based static site generators really suffer when building large sites, much like Jekyll does. I've worked on projects with well over 1,000 pages and Docusaurus, VuePress, and others simply don't have access to the jet engine that is well engineered Go. But if it works for you, run with it!