If Joomla today is similar to Joomla ca. 2010, I'd rather call each potential visitor and read them the html than use that CMS.
I'm really quite fond of the static generators now. I'm not even sure why – the principle isn't much different from a dynamic CMS with caching. And data probably belongs in a DB rather than a bunch of files. But the architecture of Hugo etc. make them really easy to understand, I can host it on google cloud storage (and probably serve thousands simultaneously without breaking a sweat), it's as fast & save as possible and I don't have to worry about passenger/postgress/memcached/etc. making any trouble.
I'm sure the next step will be web-based authoring tools for Hugo/Jekyll/etc., which will seem a little strange but actually get us close to the best of both worlds.
I'm really quite fond of the static generators now. I'm not even sure why – the principle isn't much different from a dynamic CMS with caching. And data probably belongs in a DB rather than a bunch of files. But the architecture of Hugo etc. make them really easy to understand, I can host it on google cloud storage (and probably serve thousands simultaneously without breaking a sweat), it's as fast & save as possible and I don't have to worry about passenger/postgress/memcached/etc. making any trouble.
I'm sure the next step will be web-based authoring tools for Hugo/Jekyll/etc., which will seem a little strange but actually get us close to the best of both worlds.