When comparing JBake vs Roots, the Slant community recommends Roots for most people. In the question“What are the best static site generators?” Roots is ranked 18th while JBake is ranked 26th. The most important reason people chose Roots is:
Roots has heavy corporate sponsorship and is worked on very actively as a full time job. That means you can rely on it.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Server included
Localhost server is included and can be used to preview content during editing process.
Pro Blog Aware
RSS feed, archive and tag support. Posts/Topics are a first-class citizen in jbake.
Pro Runs on / Control from the JVM
The site generator is just a specific usage of the JBake Java API. As such, jbake is easily integrated into other JVM software.
Pro Typical inputs
Markdown, asciidoc, plain HTML is supported
Pro Open Source (MIT License)
boosts permissive MIT License.
Pro Active development
Roots has heavy corporate sponsorship and is worked on very actively as a full time job. That means you can rely on it.
Pro Quick deploys
You can deploy to heroku, github pages, s3, etc. with a single command.
Pro Dynamic content
Roots supports dynamic content like jekyll for every compiler and language.
Pro Currently going through an upgrade
Roots is currently in the process examining how to leverage newer technologies to make Roots even better. You can see the new project on github: https://github.com/carrot/roots-mini
Here is the blog post explaining the next phase of Roots: https://medium.com/@jescalan/eaa10c75eb22#.uacjziaej
Here is the stack they're experimenting with:
- jade - for markup
- babel - for JS and JS transforms
- postcss - for CSS transforms
- webpack - as the core compiler
As this is a work in process, it just means the future of Roots continues to look great.
Pro Custom compilers
Not only does roots support a huge number of languages and compilers out of the box, it also allows you to insert custom compilers if you want. Fun fact, roots is the only static site generator that supports dogescript
Pro Multipass compiles
Roots compiles files once for each extension, which allows for some advanced options if you get to that stage
Pro Client-side templates
Roots will precompile your templates into js, which makes it really smooth to work with client-side MV* frameworks.
Pro Quick
Since roots is written in node, everything is compiled in parallel rather than in series, making it very quick.
Cons
Con Runs on the JVM
JVM is a double-edged sword (startup time, memory usage, CPU overhead, ...) which might be considered overkill for a static site generator.
Con No i18n (Internationalization)
There is no i18n support out of the box. And there is only one extension that does i18n compilation with a limited feature set.