description: Discussing the future of the Englert Lab Website

Potential Future Steps

Not every tool is right for every person or team. This template is built on the following major assumptions:

• Using a text/code editor (not a GUI editor) to author content in Markdown.
• Using Git and repositories to store and change your code and content.
• Using GitHub (the web interface, pull requests, Actions, etc.) as the main workflow for working on your website.
• Using GitHub Pages for hosting your website.
• Using Jekyll as a static site generator.

If you're not comfortable with or at least familiar with the above, this template may not be right for you. If you want to learn more, see this crash course on the tech used in this template.

{% hint style="info" %} The GitHub Pages hosting service is free, but only for public repos. If you want the source code of your website to be private, you'll have to pay for it. {% endhint %}

Alternatives

In the event that Dr. Englert or the maintainence team determines this website solution to be too unsustainable, I have provided a list of potential alternatives for website development. Note: there are pros and cons of every web building solution.

GUI-Based (no code)

• Wowchemy and wowchemy/starter-hugo-academic
• Squarespace
• Wix
• Webflow

| ✅ Pros of GUI-Based | ❌ Cons of GUI-Based | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | | Easy to learn. No special knowledge needed. | Customizable, but only to an extent. No bespoke functionality, like automatic citations! | | | Quick and convenient to edit. "What you see is what you get" (WYSIWYG) in-browser editors. | Ususally not free. | | | Integrated services like domain names and customer support | Harder to track revisions, authorship, reviews, collaboration, issues, etc. | | | | | |

Code-Based

• alshedivat/al-folio
• academicpages/academicpages.github.io
• photonlines/Research-Lab-Website

| ✅ Pros of Code-Based | ❌ Cons of Code-Based | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | | Offer 100% control and flexibility, with coding knowledge. | Harder to learn. Special knowledge required. | | | Git and GitHub benefits. Easily track revisions, authorship, reviews, collaboration, issues, etc. | Less convenient to edit. Need to make changes in a text/code-based way. Feedback less immediate/direct. | | | Open source and free. Maintainers more receptive to changes and new features. | Harder to setup and troubleshoot. | |

Comparison with other code-based solutions

The main benefit of this template is its automatic citations from just simple identifiers. Other academic templates allow you to enter in a full bibliography manually, but this template is unique in that it uses Manubot to fill in as many details as possible automatically. You can provide just a publication id. You can even enter in an author id and get a list of publications. If you only need a few citations, this isn't a big deal, but if you have hundreds, it can be an enormous time saver.

There are things that other academic templates have that are not included in this template, but the Greene Lab is constantly assessing these differences and looking for ways they can improve. Ideally, the template will eventually be able to do most or everything that the other templates do, and more.

Notably they are working to make sure site layout, theming/styling, components, and interactive features are all comprehensive and flexible.

{% hint style="info" %} If you feel something is missing from the template, please don't hesitate to ask for it! The Greene Lab is very receptive to feature requests and community feedback! {% endhint %}