We recently enabled <SupportsPinning> attribute in the manifest of our addin.
Simply pushing our source code to AWS S3 does not update admin managed addins. The work around seemed to be to remove the admin managed addin and then reinstall the addin with the updated manifest.
Is this the correct flow?
Also, while some users are able to see the update (pinnable sidebar), others cannot. Is there some type of cache that can be cleared or an explanation of the inconsistency?
There are 2 questions here.
Question #1 For the admin managed add-ins, should the update flow
happen through the admin portal?
If you are updating the manifest, then the add-in needs to be re-deployed. This is same as the office add-in store as the admin deployments. So you were doing the correct thing.
Question #2 Is there some kind of add-in manifest cache?
Sure - the clients would cache the manifests. Also if the people who are meant to use the add-ins are on different builds of Office, that might create a slight behavioral change as well. It will eventually be updated where eventually is most likely less than 24 hours.
Related
Why is it a good idea to limit deployment of files to the user-profile or HKCU from my MSI or setup file?
Deployment is a crucial part of most development. Please give this content a chance. It is my firm belief that software quality can be dramatically improved by small changes in application design to make deployment more logical and more reliable - that is what this "answer" is all about - software development.
This is a Q/A-style question split from an answer that became too long: How do I avoid common design flaws in my WiX / MSI deployment solution?.
As stated above this section was split from an existing answer with broader scope: How do I avoid common design flaws in my WiX / MSI deployment solution? (an answer intended to help developers make better deployment decisions).
9. Overuse of per-user file and registry deployment.
Some applications won't run correctly for all users on a machine, because the user-specific data added during installation isn't correctly added to other user's profiles and registry. In other words the application just works for the user who installed the software. This is obviously a serious design error.
There are several ways to "fix" this, but the whole issue of deployment of per-user files and settings is somewhat messy for a few fundamental reasons:
How do you reference count components installed multiple times? (for each user on the machine)
What do you do with the installed data and settings on uninstall?
How do you deal with new files and settings to install that differ from the ones that are on disk and in the registry and have user-made changes? Surely you don't overwrite automatically?
There are no real clear cut answers, but there are several alternative ways to deal with the "problems". My preferred options are 2 & 3 since I don't think Windows installer should deploy, track or attempt to modify or worse yet, uninstall user data and settings at all - it is user data that shouldn't be meddled with:
9.1 Using Windows Installer Self-Repair or similar
The first option is to get settings and files and HKCU registry keys deployed properly via the setup itself or setup-like features. There are two major ways to do this: relying on Windows Installer "self-repair" generally triggered by an advertised shortcut, or using Microsoft Active Setup.
Self-repair is what happens when you launch a shortcut to start your application, and Windows Installer kicks in and you see a progress bar whilst "something" is being installed. What is typically added are HKCU registry entries and user-profile files.
There is also another alternative to achieve this, it is called Active Setup and is also a Microsoft feature. It essentially registers "something runnable" to run once per user on logon. This can be used to set up per-user data. Active Setup allows "anything runnable" to be executed - for example a copy of files to the user-profile. .
Both of these options mean that the user data and settings are copied in place once - and from then on they are not generally touched, but in the case of "self-repair" might get uninstalled for any user who actually runs the uninstall of the application (unless the setup is designed not to do so).
Although setting up user data with self-repair and Active Setup are "established" methods to get applications running properly, it seems wrong to track user data with Windows Installer components. Why? Because it is really user data that shouldn't be meddled with once initialized.
Accordingly my honest take on the whole issue is to try to avoid deploying user specific data or registry keys and values altogether, and this is what is described next as two other user-data deployment methods.
9.2 Application Initialization of User Data
The second alternative, and one that I find much cleaner, is to change your application executable to be able to initialize all per-user settings and files based on default setting and templates copied from a per-machine location or based on application internal defaults (from the source code) instead of writing them via your setup.
In this scenario Windows Installer will not track the files or settings that are copied to each user. It is treated as user data that should not be interfered with at all. This avoids all interference such as reset or overwritten user data during upgrades and self-repair (and manual uninstall and reinstall).
If there are cases where "fixes" must be made to application settings, this can be achieved by having the application executable update the settings for each users on launch, and then tag the registry that the update has been completed.
The overall "conclusion" is that your setup should prepare your application for first launch, it should not set up the user data and settings environment. All user-profile files and HKCU settings should be defaulted by the application in case they are missing on launch - this yields a much more robust application that is easier to test for QA personnel as well. This is particularly important for Terminal Servers where self-repair is not allowed to run at all. In such cases the application data will be missing if you rely on self-repair to put user data in place.
9.3 "Cloud" or Database Storage of User Settings
To take things a step further in today's "cloud environment" - and this is in my opinion the preferred option. Why should your application be restricted to files and registry keys and values? Why not store all user specific settings in the solution's database?
Full access, control and persistence for all settings without any deployment issues at all.
You do get new management issues though, and they must be shared between developers, system administrators and database administrators. But isn't the cloud pretty much the industry standard by now?
We have been struggling long enough with roaming profiles, corrupted user registry, mishandled user-profile data files, etc.... Developers, save yourself a lot of trouble, and create yourself some new database management issues instead of deployment issues - and start yelling at a whole new bunch of people! :-).
Settings in databases are:
Not suffering from "dual source problems". There is one instance, and it is updated in real time. Not like the synchronization problems seen with user-profile and "roaming".
Inspectable, manageable and patchable
Revisable (version control - can revert older settings)
You could even "tweak" all the user settings from your setup still by running database scripts as part of deployment, but if you are in a corporate environment - isn't the thought of just raising a ticket and then have your database administrator run the maintenance scripts with proper transaction support and rollback much more appealing?
Even if you are delivering a large, fat-client vendor application for general distribution and third party use (in other words not a tailored, corporate client/server solution where you are guaranteed to have a back end database), one should consider cloud storage of user settings by having users log on to a cloud using their email or similar and then synchronize settings in real time.
Such large applications generally always need to "cache" some settings files on the computer and in HKCU, but it seems more and more possible to save all settings in a single temporary file in the user profile area which is entirely "sacrificial" and even possible to delete if it is corrupted and then download the last saved settings.
Instead of hosting the cloud yourself, it is obviously possible to use company DBOs to configure their own company-wide cloud where they have full control of all settings, and can also enforce mandatory policies and restrictions for your software's operation. Not to mention the proper backup that is possible for all user settings.
At a client of mine, in-house applications are all located on a network share. Users create shortcuts to the required applications from the network share so we can easily make sure everyone uses the latest version.
This works fairly well, although we often have an issue when users are still using applications when we'd like to release a new version. For most applications, we'd forcibly remove all the file locks on the server and release the new version. Not a very elegant solution, especially since we need assistance from another department for this.
For newer applications, I've developed a cleaner solution, where the application intermittently checks if it's still the most recent release. If it isn't, it shows a message to the user, asking him to quit the application at first convenience, or within 3 minutes. After 3 minutes, the application quits itself and all is well. However, some users will immediately try to re-start the application. The application will then show a simple MessageBox telling the user this version is currently not supported. My problem is this: while this MessageBox is visible, my executable is still locked.
I'm looking for any of the following solutions:
Releasing all locks on the current assembly files from within code
Showing a message box that lingers after the current assembly has exited
This is exactly precisely the problem that .NET ClickOnce deployment is meant to solve. Users have a shortcut they can click, the latest version is downloaded on application start, and there are no server-side executables to be locked if a user leaves their process open.
ClickOnce Deployment Overview
HowTo:Publish a ClickOnce Application
I am attempting to write a small, lightweight client, using vb.net winforms, that can install without needing elevated privileges. Before I ask my questions, let me give you a bit of an idea of what it is supposed to do.
The app will start when Windows loads, set like this from the install, with a system/notification tray icon that can be clicked on to load up specific functionality. The application install from a website, or possibly a file share, haven't quite decided yet. This client will initially request user credentials for one of our web programs, and it will talk to an already built web service to determine what functionalities of our services they have licensed access to. After this, credentials will be encrypted and saved to the users pc locally. Every five minutes, the client will pass the credentials to the websites they have access to and check to see the status of jobs that are being processed, and download available reports if needed.
So, here is what I am trying to understand. If I configure this app as a ClickOnce application, once it installs from the url or shared drive, the user will not need to do anything else, correct? Or do they have to visit that url every time they boot up to reinstall/run the client?
Another thing, I wanted to get some opinions on the best ways to do some of the things this app will be doing. I have a good idea of where I am going with it, but I have no idea of which solution to go with yet.
For instance, what is the best way to store user passed credentials on their system for a "remember me"?
Also, is the best way to have the client install with automatically starting on windows startup to configure it to create a shortcut of itself in the windows startup folder?
I am trying to keep this as lightweight as possible, and using a very small GUI, so it shouldn't be too intrusive, so any ideas on how to ensure that, while keeping it from needing admin privs to install, will also help.
If I configure this app as a ClickOnce application, once it installs
from the url or shared drive, the user will not need to do anything
else, correct? Or do they have to visit that url every time they boot
up to reinstall/run the client?
Well if they need to reinstall it, they would have to download the setup.exe file again, but why would users need to do that? CilckOnce supports automatic updates. Visiting url is certainly not needed for running the program.
what is the best way to store user passed credentials on their system
for a "remember me"?
Probably storing them as application settings. Haven't used visual studio 2012, but in visual studio 2010 you have to right-click on project in solutions explorer, go to project propeties and then create variables in Settings tab. Then you can access those variables in code using My.Settings.variableName. Not sure about security though, if you need any.
As for privileges, I think you just need a privilege to install a program. Maybe you should publish a primitive clickOnce application and experiment with it and that will answer all your other questions about clickOnce.
Hi guys I need to know if there is a tool that I can use to have my outlook addin(assume that it has been successfully installed to many users) get auto updates from a web server? I'm thinking of ClickOnce but I'm not sure of using it since there are drawbacks on its implementation.
Do you have any suggestions? or should I deploy it with ClickOnce?
any of you have an opinion/experience with ClickOnce deployment?
This is an article that describe how to add an automatic update service for an application, give it a look: Adding automatic updates to your program
Updated:
Another interesting approach is the ".NET Application Updater Component" which is the answer of a similar question "Auto-update library for .NET?" where you can find other interesting answers too.
I have a complex workflow, written in VS2010 (not sharepoint designer) for Sharepoint 2010.
Is there a document somewhere (MS?), with the recommended steps, to deploy an updated workflow, without cancelling the existing running instances of the workflow?
I can easily deploy the new workflow, however, the problem is that, I do not want to kill the existing instances of the running workflow (which is what happens by default when you deploy the workflow).
Through trial and error, I have a long list of what I think I need to do, but I really would like some confirmation.
I also need to use the new Package capability to deploy the workflow, since VS.NET will NOT be installed upon the sharepoint production server.
Thanks!
Dave
I had struggled myself with this in the past (2007 times) but couldn't find an elegant way out except completing the workflows.
Could this give you pointers - SharePoint Workflow Versioning with VS 2010