Bridgetown
6.7#12 in static site generatorsAPILinuxmacOSSelf-hosted
VisitBridgetown vs Jekyll
What both publish
| Fact | Bridgetown | Jekyll |
|---|---|---|
| Deployment | Static output can be deployed to any server that supports HTML, CSS, and JavaScript; the site recommends Render for full-stack production setups. | Because output is static, Jekyll sites can be deployed manually, through automation or with third-party hosting. |
| License | The Bridgetown source code is licensed under MIT. | Jekyll is open source and distributed under the MIT License. |
| Origin | Bridgetown started as a Jekyll fork in early 2020. | Wikipedia records Jekyll's first release as November 5, 2008 and identifies Tom Preston-Werner among its developers. |
| Plugins | Plugins extend Bridgetown projects through gems and configuration initialization, and users can write and publish their own plugins. | A plugin system with hooks lets users generate custom content and extend the build process without modifying Jekyll itself. |
Bridgetown plans
No prices published.
Jekyll plans
- JekyllFree
- Open-source JekyllFree
Pick Bridgetown if…
Bridgetown suits developers building Ruby-based static sites or full-stack applications with JavaScript frontend assets. It may fit projects that need CMS connections, database-backed routes or extensible Ruby plugins.
Pick Jekyll if…
Jekyll suits people who want to generate static websites or blogs from text and layouts. It is also relevant to users comfortable installing its Ruby and build-tool requirements.