10-4 Episode 10: Making Web Deployment Easier | 10-4

VISHRAJK149
VishalRJoshi

If you would like to dive in further detail you can also check out article series that we have started at below location:

http://vishaljoshi.blogspot.com/2009/02/web-packaging-creating-web-packages.html

Also do check out how to deploy your databases along with your web at deployment videos at below link:

http://vishaljoshi.blogspot.com/2008/12/vs-2010-for-web-developer-previews.html

-Vishal

Vaso

Thank you

Looks nice.

Can we set in the config transformation or in another place an option e.g. to not deploy some folder or even specify files which not to deploy. I have got quite often some work/test directories which I am happy to have on my test web server but when deploying I don't want to deploy them..don't you guys have got similar experiences sometimes?

Thanks and well done.

Vaso.

drewby

In reply to Vaso

#Feb 26th @ 5:11 AM

Hi Vaso,

You can accomplish this with custom MSDeploy manifests, but not with the current Visual Studio integration. In fact there is a ton of automation that you can do with MSDeploy - its a great tool and I'm really happy to see it integrating into VS.

Drew

C S S

How does the web.config transformation work in situations with multiple environments and with multiple servers in each environment, and possibly multiple environments of the same level of deployment (e.g. two testing vs. one production environment).

Specifically, is it possible to have a 'hierarchical' transformation, whereas there may be both a testing and production environment with one web.config that would apply to all of your sites. Then, in the production environment there might be multiple servers that each have a transformation file for the unique settings required for those servers in production. However in the testing environment there would not only be multiple unique servers in the testing environment, but multiple testing environments (say T1 and T2). So each server's web.config would be acted on three times, the global web config would be modified by the testing environment transformation, again by the track level transformation, and finally one for the specific server.

Such a creature would be like finding a goose that lays golden eggs. Except, in this case, it would be golden web.configs.

Moemeka
Me

forget web deployment, whats up with that snazzy IDE ?!? When can we get our hands on the yumminess

Daniel Smith

Will these changes also be available for the App.config file in non web apps?

I like the new WFP based Visual Studio by the way, but hate the change from +/- to the dreaded Vista style arrows Sad

ericmatz

I've seen way too many "roll your own" approaches to the environment-specific configs problem, so I like that there's finally an integrated solution!

Now...I'm not sold on using build configuration to drive this process. If I add a new "Staging" configuration, don't I now have the problem of keeping that in sync with the "Release" configuration?

joechung

Why did you invent a new syntax for config transformations instead of using XSLT?

jgd12345

In reply to joechung

#Mar 1st @ 5:11 PM

They mentioned this at pdc i think. It was something to do with the syntax being more similar to the web.config which i have to agree with since xslt can be quite messy.