[Jeppesen Serial Site Code Site Key Generator
Gifford Brickley
DESCRIPTION:
JeppView for Windows is installed and activated with a specific serial number and by automatically assigning a specific site key (activation code) to each installation. You can de-activate site keys in order to move an installation to a new computer (desktop or laptop) or in order to enter a different serial number by following the steps below. This process is often referred to as "deactivating site keys".
How-to modify/change serial number:
Your portfolio sounds super impressive / comprehensive so I feel like the work would just speak for itself with a simple website builder (that wouldn't require your having to maintain it)? Every time I've tried to create a comprehensive CV, coded from scratch, I've regretted it lolol.
Could I achieve what I'm looking for with something more simple? Absolutely. But the truth is that I don't need a portfolio to market myself either. My interest of late in publishing a portfolio was to use it as an exercise in implementing a background worker process. I've done a lot of SaaS feature work, but I never got around to background processes before I moved on from an individual contributor role.
Now that we're getting beyond the pandemic and my health has stabilized, it's time to shake off the rust and get back to the hustle I had previously, scratching this itch is practice for invoicing someone else for a similar job
I run my blog/portfolio (nabeel.dev/nabeel.blog) site on DigitalOcean Kubernetes, with a few other sites. Most of the content is static, but there are some dynamic components that are pulled from a database:
I'm not even sure if my current approach is harder or more time consuming overall. I may be starting at a lower layer than a CMS/SSG, but on the flip side I don't have to spend as much time trying to understand a complex system, its plugins, and dealing with the bugs and limitations that comes with all of that.
When I want to update some small thing about a website like this, the saving grace is that I can just do it without remembering the tool chain or dealing with some kind of dependency hell. Things move quickly, and reducing the tooling burden is a huge win in a lot of contexts.
20ish years ago I was so happy to write first for loop statement in php and see something prints on html. Your comment brings back that good moment back. Would stay all night excited just to learn what else I can do.
A previous colleague of mine showed me his personal website and it was just this -- a picture of him, his resume, super basic styling and no JS. He was a very skilled front end engineer so I remember being taken back until he explained why.
Now I'm using Hugo for a couple of years, and I love it. It's not really a framework (I mean the website itself doesn't depend on it) and it's very extensible. Updating Hugo is super simple too (one binary). It generates the plain HTML so it's super fast.
The reasons I had for choosing it are still valid today - it uses React, which I'm familiar with, it supports MDX, which was a big factor since I was migrating from my own custom static site generator which also used Markdown, and it was easy to use custom URLs. The type safety of Typescript and the relative ease in styling from Tailwind were also a big factor in choosing those.
There's no single software architect I talked to about that which puts tailwind as first option to use and I agree for many reasons (including maintainability and speed of change things on a solid way).
Maybe if you are a backend dev that don't care much about front for any reason or you are just printing your templates from a server side application (is there anyone still doing that in 2022?) tailwind will be a no-brainer on that as it was bootstrap back those days.
No, you don't. It's a relatively small number of class names which are internally consistent, descriptive, and intuitive, and can be easily autocompleted with an appropriate LSP server. If anything it's easier to learn than CSS.
Following the previous one, tailwind leads you to learn the CSS API the bad way, so you'll struggle when jumping into a project that does not use tailwind. i.e. font-semibold is not the same as font-weight: 600;
Which is a complete non-issue as I've been in the industry for over a decade and already know CSS. I'm full stack so CSS isn't my primary focus, but I'm certainly not going to struggle with basic stuff like that.
But you still need to define them inline of the components, so it's easier for different components to get out of sync. Using a much more limited pool of utility classes means it's easier to avoid the situation where one component has 3px padding, another has 2px padding etc.
If you're repeating the same stuff over and over it suggests to me that something needs to be refactored out into its own component. And if it does get too repetitive in one component, you always have the option of using the apply directive.
Reading templates with Tailwind is a hell, most of the time I need to scroll to the right even having a QuadHD screen to read the entire line or making it break to multiple lines. (I'm not sure about which of those is worse, I simply hate both).
I work for a digital agency which is owned by a pretty large global network of digital agencies, and is listed on the FTSE. Hundreds of people work for that agency, and thousands for the network, so we're not talking a tinpot little agency. And we use Tailwind pretty much exclusively on new projects. Furthermore, of the other developers I've worked with in the past at my current or previous employers who I'm still in contact with, probably a majority of them use Tailwind these days, including plenty with a greater focus on front end development than I have. And from the buzz I hear about it on social media, and mention of it in job adverts, it's widely used elsewhere.
I find this very hard to believe based on my own experience. I would suspect that the people you asked haven't actually tried Tailwind for long enough to make a remotely informed decision about it, or are one of the people who think it's the same thing as inline CSS.
Again, this is deeply patronising. Of course I care about the front end. Having developed Phonegap apps in the past, while working at a small agency where I didn't have any front end support, I've had to build out a nice, usable interface on many occasions.
Are you kidding me? Like I said, I work for a big digital agency network and that is still the majority of what we do, and will be for the foreseeable future. Things like Next.js are useful, but for a lot of real world stuff server-side rendering with a framework like Laravel makes far more sense.
This is not only extremely patronising, but flat out wrong. Tailwind simply doesn't work like Bootstrap, and none of the things I've used it for have ended up looking same-y. It's a very different beast to Bootstrap and if you know it at all (and it's easy to learn) you can produce a decent UI for basically anything you like without each site looking the same.
No, you really obviously weren't. You're clearly now trying to shift the scope of the discussion to make it sounds like I was talking solely about my experience, which I wasn't. I work with a team of other developers and I often have to make decisions when choosing a stack that go against my personal preferences and since I'm a grown-up I have no ego about doing so.
When it came to work reladetd stuff to show off, I found a simple google doc with plain text much more effective. I just write the project name, the timeframe, technologies used and my role in the team.
So it would be more interesting to use a JavaScript framework since a portfolio often means no server. But again, there is a JavaScript fatigue to setup a new project with NPM, Webpack, Vite, React, Angular, Vue, ESLint, Jest, ...
In the early days, we used a white paper to show our photo, info, portfolio, education, skills, references and any other relevant information. That is called Curriculum vitae! The famous CV was a simple printed document. Of course, you had to bring your skills certificates.
Now, I've seen a lot of programmers portfolio showing their skills. Some portfolio websites use frameworks, others only use the Triforce. My belief is that we need to build our portfolio in a simple way, but elegant. The site must be fast, lightweight and neat (like the printed document we used to show). We can achieve that using only the triforce. If we use frameworks, we might overload the website with unnecessary libraries. If the browser can load your website under 5 seconds, then you're good to go!
I have already created my portfolio website with above mentioned tools. I love these tools because they make creating a beautiful portfolio website process very easy.
Here is my portfolio link mahmad.me
Why a custom site generator? This is related to last bullet above. I wanted to be able to generate my publication list as well as abstract pages for each publication directly from a BibTeX file. I also wanted structured data markup for this. So since no existing site generators did this, I hacked something together. The code is a mess (in a private repo for that reason). I wrote it quickly and have hacked in new features as I've wanted them. Think duct tape and silly putty holding it all together.
The publication list page generated by the site generator from a BibTeX file is at:
cicirello.org/publications/ .
And an example of one of the abstract pages also derived from the BibTeX file: cicirello.org/publications/cicirel...
I wouldn't use a toolkit for complex webapps like react or such unless there are solid reasons to do so, like if your backend is already in place and is API-first or something. If you want to use the opportunity to use and learn something new the I'd go for offline static site generation with Gatsby or Hugo or something. But I'd rather avoid that as it's probably overkill for a personal portfolio website. You want to concentrate on other things when building that rather than learning new stuff meant for fringe cases.
795a8134c1