@pimoore I think all template systems like the one Hugo or Jekyll have are equally terrible with their own even worse limits
I have used both Hugo and Jekyll a lot, over the years and Hugo is much easier to deal with in the long term. Every time I’ve used Jekyll I always end up spending a lot of time dealing with ruby related issues. Plus it being dirt slow
@pimoore Both of them have dependencies. But with hugo it is not visible to the user because golang produce a single binary.
Jekyll on the other hand require the supported version of Ruby + the correct set of ruby package versions for it all to work. And if you use plugins in your Jekyll it becomes even more complex.
Plus that sometimes it isn't that obvious that something stopped working.
The amount of time I have spent fixing issues with Hugo changes is miniscule compared to the monthly ruby package isssues I had to deal with when I used Jekyll.
@leonp Just to add to what others have said, we started with Jekyll and switched to Hugo because of performance. Making everything faster is still one of my top priorities, so ever little bit helps.
@leonp After having used many different more or less the same template languages like them over the years I just see them all as the same with very minor differences