Why do you want static pages?
You can use a webcopier software to simply copy your dynamic pages which convert them to static. Although, what is wrong with static pages? To convert the dynamic pages to static will just waste space on your server.
Custodian: there are several programs (both for Linux and for Windows) that make dynamic URLs look static.
Couldn't you use a "regular" CMS together with such a "URL rewriter"?
(I think you can use .htaccess for Linux, but I'm not sure, I use Windows myself.)
A webserver cut down for serving just static files will be faster and more secure than a dynamic site just because it's simpler.
I've read that IMDB works in that way. Their system builds static pages in regular intervals. But as far as I know it is of course their own custom system.
Typo3 can export static pages.
However, if you ask because you have heard that static pages get better rankings, then be assured that "pseudo-static" pages (using URL rewrite rules) work just as well!
Movable Type publishes static pages. You could use it as a CMS without too much trouble.
Also check out OrbSpinner, CityDesk and PhpWCMS.
In development now, but slated to come out this December, is IBD Micro-CMS, which looks quite promising. Seems to be AJAX-based.
iSmart Create exports "pseudo-static" pages for search engines
pmkpmk, You where saying typo3 can export static pages. I was wondering...
In theory could you install it on your local pc to develop and maintain the site localy, then simple upload the html files when you make changes, or even better set up some form of sync. I am just gettign to grips with typo 3 and your idea of exporting html pages may be just what I need.
I have turned the directory script Gossamer Links into a CMS, it can build actual static pages. Quiet a bit of hacking involved though and it is not cheap.
Links as a cms.. I can see how that would work. Did you use the text file version or links sql?
you could put a proxy such as squid in front of your CMS which would store "static" pages
Hi Mack, I have done it with both but prefer the sql version. Yeah it works quite well and being static it flys.
Thanks for all the input.
Kinof thought this thread died days ago.
I want to do static pages for a combination of reasons.
1. My upload speed is so slow that using a CMS over ther Web would be futile.
2. My sites don't require dynamic content.
3. As was mentioned earlier, it is simpler. Rather than trying to make my dynamic pages look static or try to hide the technology behind the dynamic pages, I would rather just have static pages
I plan on setting up a CMS on a local testing server and then push the final product up to the public server when I am ready.
I have looked at Typo3 - Is it really as hard to get a handle on as some of the reviews I have read suggest? I'm looking for a long term solution that could handle many sites and possibly a shopping cart.
Any more thoughts and suggestion would be appreciated.