I have created a project using Qt and I found the Repogen tool that cames with Qt.
In the official documentation says that I must host the repo in a server in order to receive updates or create an online installer. I tried using GitHub as a hosting but maintenance tool doesn't recognize it.
I added he repository url in the settings window of the maintenance tool pointing to the base repo path and then pointing directly to Updates.xml but the same error.
What kind of web server must I use to deliver the release files?
I resolve this issue, by creating a file service in Flask and using a free hosting to deliver files.
Seems like hosting in GitHub is not useful in that case.
Related
I published my project, which uses Application Insights, on an IIS server. The files I published are: all DLL from Application Insights, the script tag for collects http requests from the view that i want to track, and the applicationInsights.config with the intrssumentation key in it.
The issue is that not collect SQL dependencies. But the interesting thing is that when I run the project in Visual Studio it collects all the dependencies including the SQL dependencies.
In this case, what could be the problem? a configuration issue on the server? something missing from publish to server?
If you're seeing them collected locally while debugging, but not when deployed, then chances are you have a different version of .net or the AI sdks installed in the 2 places, or you're missing a required library when you deploy? make sure your deployed items are the same as your local dependencies?
see: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-monitor/app/auto-collect-dependencies
for a bunch of the details about versions and packages, etc.
I am trying to create a web app using ASP.NET core, d3.js and jquery. I hired someone on upwork to create the app. He was able to get it working on my local machine by adding libraries d3, jquery, and others under wwwroot/lib. However, on the remote github repository, these libraries are not included. I have seen others on stackoverflow also not include the libraries when pushing to remote and was wondering why this is the case.
I would like to publish my app using Azure, but when I do this I get an error and I believe it's because the libraries are missing. I know that I can just add the libraries to the remote repository, but I don't think this is the correct method. how are the libraries added with MS Azure?
You can add this to a inside your .csproj file to enforce copying NuGet assemblies to the built output:
<CopyLocalLockFileAssemblies>true</CopyLocalLockFileAssemblies>
However, note that the build output (bin/Release/netcoreapp*/*) is not supposed to be portable and distributable, the output of dotnet publish is. As you have said, you get work in local, so copy the assemblies to the build output is probably very useful when the app is upload to azure.
For more details, you could refer to this SO thread.
I see in Azure that I can add a Git Repository to Azure and it automatically do deployments from it.
I tested successfully with an old project that has only Classic ASP. I think its very cool with a JavaScript only site too. These type of projects are not compiled. Just upload the changed files to the server and we are ready.
But how to do it with a .Net project where I generate compiled files? I need to create another repository for the Production files? or a branch or how is the "best practice" here?
You have two options.
1-Host your code on github, and allow github to publish new version to your azure websites.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NGieL0tinw
2-Use local git repository and push to azure manually.
http://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/develop/net/common-tasks/publishing-with-git/
The problem is, that when I commit project directory, there is uploaded everything including source code.
Not really sure why you want to upload via FTP? You shouldn't commit your own compiled binaries to source control for deployment though.
You could take a look at AppHarbor, just push your code with git and it will be build and deployed automatically.
more about AppHarbor
Real alternatives to Windows Azure PaaS (web role)?
Does it matter? Since asp.net pages can be compiled on the server, having source files on the web server is sometimes normal so IIS knows not to allow access to them.
That said, uploading output binaries into source control is generally a bad idea - it is better to do the deployment from your build server.
Actually, this is kind of hard.
For months, I've tried to automatize our deployment, without absolute success. For my experience, I can see only way to do that:
Have a build server on your deployment machine (or same network)
A build server will pull out your code from repository, say, once per minute and will check for modifications. If there's modifications, it will execute the build scripts related to this project. I suggest you to use TeamCity, because it is very easy to use compared to CruiseControl (I'm not sure if you can use Git with TFS). You can program your build server for build your solution or project and after, you can execute an msbuild script to copy the files to the production folder (e.g: c:\inetpub\yourapp or \\my_server\inetpub\yourapp). You can use MSBuild's Copy Task to do that.
UPDATE 1: I didn't tried, but if helps, you can push to an FTP server using git-ftp
UPDATE 2: Seems that some guy did some workarounds and successfully deployed his app using git and FTP.
I am looking for some ideas on how to offer a installation package for my ASP.NET website. Some things I need to be able to do is read/write Registry keys, get the database(s) information and test the connection and I must be able to overwrite the existing website without an uninstall and update the web config on new versions. I do not wish to uninstall the website and re-install it. I would like minimum downtime on upgrades. I think I am going to have to implement a custom solution and if this is true how can i include all the output of my web application into my custom solution?
EDIT: I am not installing this on my own system(s). This is for distribution to other clients who will be installing/upgrading the website. It is important that I be able to upgrade to the latest asp.net website without uninstalling. Ideally it would be overwriting the existing site and updating the web.config file.
Option 1. Create web application installation package
Use Web Setup Project for creating a web application installation package (.msi)
Creating or Adding a Setup Project at MSDN
You can create your installation the way it will offer user an Upgrate option of your application if it's already installed on his or her machine. That's not a problem.
Alternatives to Web Setup Project (all of them can handle upgrade scenarios):
Wise Installation Studio
InstallShield
Nullsoft Scriptable Install System - this one is free and open source
Optoin 2. Deploy web application on the server
You can use NAnt or MSBuild or IIS Web Deployment Tool for these tasks automation.
For example with NAnt of MSBuild you could specify tasks like these:
get project files from source repository
update .config file and maybe some other files if needed
compile you web application
update registry settings on the server
update database schema on the server
synchronize files (x-copy) between you build folder to IIS web folder
Web Deployment Blog
Option 3. Distribute your web applications via Web Plafrom Installer.
http://www.microsoft.com/web/
Have you looked into Web Deployment Projects or the IIS Web Deployment Tool?
I think you can build asp.net application into .msi package and install it. Is that what you are looking for? And then you can build all of your customization into pre-deployment and post-deployment scripts.
I use NAnt and NSIS with some small console apps where they can't easily do some manipulations I require.
Do you tried the new Microsoft Web Platform Installer (new! 2.0 beta)?