The logs are no help at all, both the "good" patch and the "bad" patch have
pretty much the same log, there is no mention of "skipping installation of... "
in any log.
We have some advances, we do have some consistency when raising the version of
the PatchFamily AND the AssemblyFileVersionAttrib
95% of my installers have used major upgrades as their servicing strategy.
The other 5% used minor upgrades because I either
a) wanted to create a story of a non-priv user being able to perform
upgrades
or
b) wanted to be able to create patches
For the standard run of the mill business appl
That's true in theory but in practice it's often better to change it
every build. This simplifies the upgrade semantics (upgrade is an
upgrade is an upgrade, rather than worrying about whether it's a small
update, minor upgrade or major upgrade) and makes it much easier to
test that your product ca
On 22/03/2013 17:24, Daniel Madill wrote:
> Hi Alain,
>
> In general, Product ID="*" is a good thing. Each new build should generate a
> new product code because it typically means you've made changes to the
> product (i.e. made a new version). If you want to test the Maintenance dialog
> then r
4 matches
Mail list logo
