Sunday, 20 January 2008

Workflow: tasks which can only be actioned by task owner

When coming to Visual Studio workflows, something which surprises many SharePoint developers is that tasks assigned in the workflow can actually be actioned by any SharePoint user with basic permissions. In the worst scenario, 'basic permissions' means any user with contribute permissions to the SharePoint web which contains the workflow tasks list, and clearly this could be a whole lot of users who have nothing to do with your workflows. In the best case, you might have tied down permissions so that only users involved in workflows can use the list. Even so, this still means that any actor in the workflow can respond to any task, not just tasks which have actually been assigned to them. To my mind, this is bad - all it takes is a confused user to accidentally respond to someone else's task and your workflow is in a whole world of chaos.

So what can we do about this?

Well, there doesn't seem to be much written about this, but fortunately the best solution (AFAIK) is also the simplest one. Before we dive in, I notice other people needing to solve this problem have taken the approach that since a workflow task is just a list item, we can execute some code to set permissions on the list item using the API. A logical tactic, but happily there is special provision for doing this in the workflow framework - we still need to write a little code, but it's much simpler than that approach. The key is the 'SpecialPermissions' property of the CreateTask activity:



Pitfall - confusingly, clicking the ellipses button (...) for the property presents a generic VS collection editor (shown below), which as far as I can tell just flat cannot be used with this property - all the controls are disabled!




I'm assuming this is a bug in the Visual Studio 2005 Extensions for Workflow Foundation, so we'll ignore that! However, clicking the tiny blue 'bind property' button presents the more familiar 'bind the property to an instance variable' dialog - assuming you haven't already created a variable to store the permissions for this CreateTask, we should select 'Bind to a new member', and create either a field or property to store the permissions:



This creates a collection object, specifically a HybridDictionary, to which we can add items for each permission we need for this task. And we only need a handful of code lines to do it! Since we're likely to use it for many (i.e. all) tasks in our workflow, let's have a separate method we can call each time:

private void setTaskPermissions(HybridDictionary boundDictionary, string sTaskOwner)

{

     boundDictionary.Clear();

     boundDictionary.Add(sTaskOwner, SPRoleType.Contributor);

     boundDictionary.Add("NT AUTHORITY\\authenticated users", SPRoleType.Reader);

}


So, we pass in the collection specific to each task, and also the string username for the task owner. We then add an entry for the task owner to the dictionary with the 'contributor' permission, and one for all other users with just read permissions. Note we also clear out the dictionary before adding in case this task has already been issued (i.e. something got rejected in the workflow and we came back to this task a second time) - this avoids any errors due to the key already existing in the dictionary.


The calling code then, looks like this:

setTaskPermissions(approveExpenseClaim_SpecialPermissions, taskProps.AssignedTo);

This would be added to the code for each CreateTask activity in your workflow. The first parameter is the variable we bound earlier to the SpecialPermissions property (of the particular task we are dealing with), and taskProps is the SPWorkflowTaskProperties object which holds data for the task.

And that's it - much less code than you'd need to modify permissions for the list item with general API usage. The effect of this is that the task owner is the only standard user (administrators with full control excepted) who can respond to the task, but all others can read it. Needless to say, you could customize the code to your specific permission requirements if they are different to mine.

The user experience

One final thing worth pointing out is that the user experience might not be quite as slick as you'd like. Since we've restricted permissions on the item, any user who clicks on the task but doesn't have permissions will see the standard access denied message:



Personally I think an improvement would be to show a more friendly message, but this would require substantially more effort and complexity. My view is that for a few lines of code, this approach is a great trade off between effort required and benefit of protecting the integrity of the workflow - I'm definitely not a fan of sleepless nights wondering just what would happen in the workflow if users unintentionally responded to tasks which didn't belong to them, so it works for me. As always, if you've implemented a different way of dealing with this problem or have other comments, it would be great to hear.

Thursday, 10 January 2008

Resources from my workflow deep-dive presentation

Had a lot of fun presenting VS workflows at the UK SharePoint user group last night. We seemed to have weather issues (again) which might have put some people off travelling, but we still had a great crowd of around 100-120 people. As promised, here are my resources (my 'workflow bonanza pack' in fact ;-)). In the zip behind the link below, you will find:

  • Slide deck (presentation title: "Workflow: A deep dive into developing workflows for SharePoint using Visual Studio and Infopath")
  • Sample code for the state machine expenses workflow I built
  • My workflow information pack document

Much of the goodness is in the document - the contents are:

  • Links to my favourite workflow resources (blogs, books etc.)
  • How to: work with SharePoint tasks and e-mails in workflows
  • How to: Pass data into an InfoPath task edit form
  • How to: retrieve what the user entered into an InfoPath task edit form
  • How to: debug a workflow
  • How to: use serialization to retrieve data from an InfoPath form
  • Advanced workflow tips
  • Workflow pitfalls
  • Appendix 1 - correlation tokens

You can download all this from http://sharepointchris.googlepages.com/COB_WorkflowResources.zip

P.S. I'll be expanding on this content - the next couple of articles will be workflow-focused.

Friday, 4 January 2008

Speaking at UK SharePoint user group on workflow

For anybody interested in workflow, I'll be speaking at the UK user group next week at Microsoft's London Victoria office on 10th Jan. There are two great sessions so I'd encourage UK SharePointers who can get to London to come down. Needless to say, I'll be posting my slides/sample code etc. for those further afield.

For those considering coming down, the meeting should be fun and it looks like a high turnout - we have over 100 people registered already. My fellow speaker is SharePoint MVP and all-round good guy Andrew Woodward.

The timetable and session abstracts are:

1800 - 1830 Arrive

1830 - 1930  Workflow: A deep dive into developing workflows for SharePoint using Visual Studio and Infopath - Chris O'Brien

Of the three types of workflow available to the SharePoint developer, only Visual Studio workflows provide complete flexibility and power. Without the right information however, the learning curve can be steep for the uninitiated. In this session we’ll start with initial decisions such as SharePoint Designer workflows vs. Visual Studio workflows, sequential vs. state-machine, and InfoPath vs ASP.Net for forms. From there we’ll cover the key steps to get a workflow up and running including retrieving data from an InfoPath form, configuring workflow activities, and deployment of the workflow. Over several demos, we’ll build a basic state-machine workflow, and show why workflow is a valuable addition to any SharePoint developer’s skillset.

1930 - 2000 Snacks and drinks

2000 - 2100 Search Server 2008 – What is it, how does it affect me and should I be testing it? - Andrew Woodward

A look at the recently announced Search Server 2008.  We will walk through an installation and demonstration of the new Federated Search capabilities, what’s provided out of the box, what you can get from free, how to leverage sites using Live.com and how to federate results from Google. We will discuss how this fits in with your existing WSS and MOSS deployments and the release timescales.


Registration/more info is at http://suguk.org/forums/thread/7300.aspx - please add to the thread leaving your full name

Monday, 17 December 2007

Using the SharePoint Content Deployment Wizard

So if you've read the earlier posts about the tool (Introducing the SharePoint Content Deployment Wizard and When to use the SharePoint Content Deployment Wizard) and figure this is a useful tool, let's go onto the next level of detail. Generally speaking the Content Deployment Wizard 'just works', but if you want to know more about the different options, read on. This post contains reference information and a guide to some deployment scenarios at the end.

Firstly, let's remind ourselves of some of the fundamental things to remember when moving content using the Content Migration API (the underlying SharePoint API used by the tool):

  • dependencies of selected content (e.g. referenced CSS files, master pages) can be evaluated - in the tool they are automatically included in the export - check 'Exclude dependencies of selected objects' to disable this
  • all required content types, columns etc. are automatically included in the export
  • in contrast to STSADM export, it is possible to retain GUIDs during deployment (where objects are not being reparented) - check 'Retain object IDs and locations' to enable this
  • no filesystem files (assemblies, SharePoint Solutions/Features etc.) are deployed - these must already be present on the target for the import to succeed)
  • the following content does not get captured by the Content Migration API - alerts, audit trail, change log history, recycle-bin items, workflow tasks/state

In particular it's the 2nd and 3rd points which make the API (and the Wizard) a good way to deploy content in SharePoint.

What can be deployed?

The Content Deployment Wizard allows any content to be selected for export - site collections, webs, lists/document libraries, folders, right down to individual list items and files. Objects in the treeview can be added to the export by right-clicking them, which for a web, brings up a menu shown below:



These are explained:-

  • 'include all descendents' - exports the container and anything beneath it
  • 'exclude descendents' - exports the container only
  • on webs only, the 'include content descendents' option is shown - this will include all immediate content such as lists/libraries, but will exclude all child webs of the web.

Note that on the import, the Wizard will bring in all the contents of the selected .cmp file(s) - there is no option to partially import a package. Hence if different import options are required for different content, the exports should be broken into separate chunks.

Export options

On the export settings screen, numerous options can be applied to exports:

  • 'Exclude dependencies of selected objects' - by default the Content Migration API will automatically include dependent objects of whatever you select. This can include CSS files, master pages, images and the like, but also list items which are displayed on a page included in the export. This can be turned off with this checkbox so only the objects you select are exported.
  • 'Export method' (options are 'ExportAll', 'ExportChanges') - for now ExportAll is the option to select, ability to export changes only will come in a future release
  • 'Include versions' (options are 'LastMajor', 'CurrentVersion', 'LastMajorAndMinor', 'All') - should be self-explanatory
  • 'Include security' (options are 'None', 'WssOnly', 'All')' - note that since security is defined at the level of a web, selecting one of the include security options for a smaller object (e.g. list) actually exports security for the entire web. Both 'WssOnly' and 'All' export SharePoint item-level object permissions, so if you're using SharePoint groups to manage security for example, both the actual permissions and groups will be carried over, and you can add a different set of users/AD groups on the destination. See Migrating Security Information on MSDN for more details.

Import options

On the import we also have several options, some of which correspond to options selected on the export:

  • 'Import web URL' (actually shown on the 'Bind to site' screen) - this is used for reparenting operations only. If you are just moving content from source to destination but are not changing the location in the structure, this textbox can remain blank. Alternatively, for operations where a web or list is being imported but the parent web will not be the exact same web on the destination, the URL of the new target web URL should be entered.

    Note that the later option to 'Retain object IDs and locations' should not be selected when reparenting, since we are changing the location in this case.
  • 'From single file'/'From multiple files' options - the Wizard always exports with file compression enabled, so when exporting content over 25MB, files are split into several files at this threshold. When importing from such an export, select the 'From multiple files' option and browse to the folder. In the textbox, enter the 'base filename' - this should be the name of the first file without the number e.g. 'MyExport.cmp' rather than 'MyExport1.cmp'. 
  • 'Retain object IDs and locations' - this setting requires particular consideration. Duplicate GUIDs are not permitted in one database (i.e. SP web application), so the choice often depends on what you are importing. If you are taking a site from development to production, the object GUIDs will not yet exist on the destination, so I check the box to ensure the objects are assigned the same IDs in both environments, and all linkages are preserved. If you are reparenting a list or web, you will leave the box unchecked, so that new GUIDs are assigned are the location can therefore be changed.

    I highly recommend reading the content listed in the 'Useful links' section at the end of the article to properly understand this setting.
  • 'Include security' - this allows security information in a package to be imported, assuming one of the options to include security was selected on the export
  • 'Version updates' - allows control over whether new versions should be added to existing files, or whether the existing version should be replaced etc.
  • 'User info update' - allows control over whether 'last modified' information should be imported. Often this only makes sense if the same set of users exist in the source and destination

Scenarios quick reference

The following table lists the most common settings for a given deployment task:

Deployment item

Typical settings

Entire site collection
  • Site collection should first be created on the destination.
  • When exporting, select 'include all descendents'.
  • When importing for the first time, ensure 'retain object IDs and locations' is checked.
  • Select one of the 'include security' options if you wish to deploy object permissions and users
Web
  • When exporting, select 'include all descendents'.
  • When importing for the first time, ensure 'retain object IDs and locations' is checked if web will have same parent as on source.
  • If web will have a different parent, do not check retain object IDs and locations' and ensure 'import web URL' is specified
Document library/list
  • When exporting, select 'include all descendents'.
  • When importing for the first time, ensure 'retain object IDs and locations' is checked if list will have same parent as on source (i.e. not reparenting).
  • On subsequent imports, ensure 'import web URL' is specified if not importing to the root web, and do not check 'retain object IDs and locations'
File/list item
  • Ensure the parent library/list exists on the destination
  • Do not check 'retain object IDs and locations' if the item already exists on the destination

 

So hopefully that's some useful reference information. On a final note, the next beta version with much improved treeview performance should be ready over the next week or so!

Useful links

Friday, 14 December 2007

When to use the SharePoint Content Deployment Wizard

Following my introduction to the tool last time, today I want to try to help position the tool for people who aren't sure if it could be useful to them or for what scenarios - if you only take one thing away from my postings on the Content Deployment Wizard it should be this.

I see the 'value-add' of the Content Deployment Wizard over existing deployment methods such as STSADM export/content deployment in Central Administration to be:

  • ability to "cherry-pick" content to deploy using a treeview - this is from entire site collection down to individual list item or file. (This is the big one since the standard SharePoint tools do not supply a method to do this)
  • ability to control whether object GUIDs are retained - this is required for scenarios where the destination should be a mirror-image of the source, such as staging/production environments for the same site
  • ability to move certain objects (limited to webs and lists in the initial release) to a new location on the import target, known as 'reparenting'

I would suggest the tool could well have a place in your SharePoint toolbox, but it's likely to be something you use every now and then, rather than all the time. The two main scenarios where I use the tool are:

  • at the end of the development phase when I need to move a site from development to staging/production. Here, the tool allows me to be sure that all relationships/linkages between objects will be preserved (so no problems with ListViewWebParts/DataViewWebParts/InfoPath forms for example)
  • any odd occasions where I have a need to move a particular document library/list, or a particular set of files (e.g. master page, page layouts, CSS etc.). This assumes by the way, that the files were not deployed with a feature - I wouldn't recommend mixing the deployment methods like that.

N.B. It should also be possible to use the tool for ongoing updates to specific files/list items through different environments in a development/test/staging/production situation. An example of this is deployment of just master pages, page layouts and CSS files on a WCM site (meaning all other content authored by the client [e.g. in the 'Pages' library] does not get overwritten on the target) but I haven't had the opportunity to try this on a real project yet.

Some areas where the tool cannot be used (i.e. the tool does not yet support this usage) are:

  • exporting only changes since a certain timestamp (change token) from a site
  • importing individual list items/files to a new location on the target (reparenting)

On the last point, the 'new location' would be a document library or list, since these items have to be in such a container - they cannot exist at the root of a web. Currently the tool supports reparenting webs and lists, but not individual list items/files. What is currently possible with individual list items/files, is moving selected items from a source to a target where the structure is the same (e.g. move Doc2 and Doc5 from "Team documents" on the source to "Team Documents" on the target). Usefully, whenever a file is exported/imported using the tool, the associated list item is also deployed, meaning metadata updates to column values are deployable.

Hopefully that might help you understand where the Wizard fits in. If you're thinking the Wizard could be useful to you from time to time, stay tuned for my next post which will have more detailed 'usage' information. 

Wednesday, 5 December 2007

Introducing the SharePoint Content Deployment Wizard

Regular readers might have spotted I've been slightly quieter than usual over the past few weeks - actually I've not been slacking, but working on a tool which you might find useful from time to time. As I've discussed in numerous posts, deployment of SharePoint artifacts is something that's perhaps more complex than it should be, and the standard tools provided don't always simplify this picture. Personally, over my past few MOSS projects, there have been several times when I've thought:

  • I just need to move this document library from A to B
  • I just need to move these selected files (e.g. master page, page layouts, CSS etc.) from A to B
  • I just need to move this web from A to B
  • I just need to move this site collection from A to B
  • I just need to move these 20 list items from A to B

If only there was an easy way! CMS 2002 users may remember the SDO export mechanism which allowed you to use a treeview to select exactly which content you wished to move, but unfortunately there's no similar tool for MOSS. Sure, we have Content Deployment and STSADM export etc., but the lowest level of granularity is a web, and if you don't want to overwrite the whole thing neither option can be used. The only other option is to write code which uses the Content Migration API. This is fine for projects which have the appropriate development skills and time, but otherwise things can be tricky.

Enter the SharePoint Content Deployment Wizard.

The tool provides a wizard-like approach to deploying content between SharePoint sites. The selected content is exported using the Content Migration API (PRIME), giving a .cmp file (Content Migration Package) which can be copied to other servers.

Since pictures are often more useful than words, let's look at using the tool. Click to enlarge any of the images below:

EXPORTING CONTENT

Welcome screen (click any image to enlarge):


Select action (import or export) and provide site URL:

 

For export, use the treeview to select which content you wish to deploy. On container objects such as webs, there are options about whether descendent objects should be included:

 

Select options around security, dependencies, versions and name of the export file:
 
 
 
The details are shown back for confirmation, and when 'Finish' is clicked the export will begin:
 
 
 
IMPORTING CONTENT
 

Browse to the .cmp file we exported in the previous steps, and select options around security, versions and, importantly for some scenarios, whether object IDs should be retained:
 
 

The details are shown back for confirmation, and when 'Finish' is clicked the import will begin:
 
 
 

And that's the gist of it. This is the first beta of the tool and I'm sure there will be issues. Regardless, when using any tool which makes this kind of change to your data you should always take a backup before performing the import. Depending on what you're doing, it could be difficult to revert back to the previous state otherwise.

Some other notes:

  • the tool must be installed locally on the server which hosts the site
  • not all features of the Content Migration API are supported by the tool
  • the next beta (mid-December) will properly support large sites - currently the site bind operation can be slow for large sites since the treeview is built in one operation
  • it must be run under an account which has the appropriate permissions to the SharePoint site - use the Windows 'Run as..' feature to do this if necessary (shown below in the image below- right-click on the .exe and select 'Run as..')


 
In the next post, I'll cover details on different usages of the tool and the effect of different options. The tool also supports reparenting (e.g. importing a web or list to a different parent on the target) and I'll talk about this.

You can download the tool now from www.codeplex.com/SPDeploymentWizard. All feedback (particularly bug reports) welcome, either post here or on the Codeplex site.

Sunday, 25 November 2007

Part 2 : Blending publishing/collaboration functionality in SharePoint

A couple of months ago I wrote an article on some of the issues around building sites which are not pure publishing or collaboration solutions, but which mix features of the two. I mentioned at the time that I would follow up on these issues and any others we came across at the end of the project, so here it is.

As a quick recap, we said that characteristics of a site which blends publishing/collab features could be:

  • site has completely bespoke look and feel/navigation
  • users will work with document libraries, discussions, calendars etc.
  • site templates or definitions are used to create several sites with the same content/functionality
  • custom workflow is used to support a business process (other than standard content publishing), perhaps with InfoPath forms

    So let's cover some of the issues you may face in projects like this:

    Look and feel of system pages

    This refers to the fact that whilst pages you create will happily use your custom master page, any 'system' pages in the '_layouts' directory will not share this look and feel by default since they reference a separate master page, 'application.master', which is also stored on the filesystem in '_layouts'. Such pages are often seen due to the use of collaboration functionality in our site, examples being when a user uploads or edits metadata for a file, starts a workflow etc.

    In fact this turned out to be less of an issue than I anticipated because:

    • a quick test showed that the use of a HTTP module to switch the master page of these pages works fine. Several people have documented this approach, and I note that Ted Pattison has provided a Codeplex feature for those who would prefer not to write their own code for this. (N.B. though not strictly supported, the idea behind the HTTP module approach is that it is better than modifying files installed with SharePoint such as 'application.master', and can be disabled with a switch if we need to fall back in line with official support.)
    • our client decided this was a low priority item, that we may or may not deal with further down the line

    On this subject, I see that Microsoft have themselves released KB article How to customize application pages in the Layouts folder in SharePoint Server 2007 and in Windows SharePoint Services 3.0. Bizarrely, the proposed solutions are modifying the standard files but taking backups of the originals, or duplicating the 'layouts' virtual directory in IIS - the HTTP module idea is not mentioned. Without dwelling on this too much, this seems crazy to me and I'm not the only one. I still much prefer the HTTP module solution and will use this on my projects where it is required, though will be sure to regression test thoroughly.


    Use of InfoPath with forms authentication

    This is an interesting illustration of blending the two types of functionality - collaboration solutions may well use InfoPath for forms, but publishing sites typically use forms auth for a customized/branded login experience. Straight away we ran into problems using InfoPath with forms auth - essentially the link to create a new instance of an InfoPath form in a forms library would disappear (example link shown below [Windows auth enabled here]):



  • It took a while for me to track down that this is related to the 'Client Integration' switch in Central Admin. For a forms auth site, this gets set to 'off' by default, but defaults to 'on' for windows auth sites. Unfortunately, resolving the problem isn't as simple as flicking the switch back, since what the switch does is remove certain links and disable ActiveX controls which integrate with the browser for link-handling. With the switch enabled again, the InfoPath link reappears on the content type, but when a link to say, a Word document is followed, the browser now shows the basic prompt to download or save the file. This means the more sophisticated 'do you want to check out or open as read-only' prompt is lost and users must work with documents offline and upload to SharePoint at the end of editing, rather than being able to save back directly to the SharePoint repository. In other words, unacceptable to most for a SharePoint 2007 collaboration solution.

    In the end I found others in the same position, but didn't find a solution in a short timeframe. Microsoft support tells me "they were unaware of any instances of of these two features working together in this way", so the disappointing conclusion is that these two bits of functionality don't play well together. Our client thus decided to accept windows authentication (our authentication store was always going to be AD rather than SQL anyhow). However, I'm actually convinced it would be possible to get this working given more time - I think the way forward would be to amend the site design to have a link to the InfoPath form in the standard content of a page rather than relying on SharePoint to supply the link. The information supplied in How to: Use Query Parameters to Invoke Browser-Enabled InfoPath Forms would be used here. I'm sure this must be possible and others have done it, I'd be interested to hear from anyone who has.


    Overidden control not appearing on standard collaboration pages

    Our client had requested some customizations to the search box, and going through our bug list towards the end of development, I realised that our customized version was present on pages we had created, but not existing list pages such as [MyList]/Forms/AllItems.aspx or similar. This seemed strange given that all pages were using our custom master and shared the same header! Digging deeper, this is caused by the fact that SharePoint uses a delegate control to load the search box .ascx file, and to properly override the control across the site, we needed to create a Feature to specify that our .ascx file should be used in preference to the standard control. If we had directly replaced the existing control on the filesystem this would not be required, but when adding custom files in order to avoid modifications to existing files, this extra piece is required. One to look out for when building sites of this nature.


    Summary

    I read some blogs/discussion threads earlier this week which suggest customizing SharePoint in this way is nigh on impossible, but our project (and surely many others) prove this isn't the case. As is often the case with such a functional platform, there's perhaps a greater chance of success if you understand the nuts and bolts of what SharePoint is doing, but extensive customizations to collaboration-focused sites are inherently possible!

    Sunday, 11 November 2007

    Change a SharePoint site's URL

    Something you may find yourself tasked with at some point, is changing the URL of an existing SharePoint 2007 site. This is a fairly interesting scenario, and it's fair to say the relationship between SharePoint and IIS makes this more complex than for a standard .Net site. However, there are several possible solutions. The first things many of us would think of as potential approaches would probably be:

    • extending the web application onto another URL
    • using Alternate Access Mappings somehow

    Depending on your site both could be valid methods, but as with anything SharePoint-related, there are different things to watch out for with the different approaches. As an example, extending the web application wasn't the right approach for our scenario for the following reasons:

    • the site shouldn't actually exist at the old URL, but a redirect was required
    • InfoPath forms don't seem to deal well with the 'extended web application' configuration. (Problem detail - on one URL everything will be fine, but if the two web applications use separate site collections, on the other you're likely to see security errors when opening forms. This is because the form templates are referenced in the other site collection - a document library can only have one URL to the document template, and publishing a form to a content type stores an absolute link in the content database.)

    Additionally some quick tests with Alternate Access Mappings didn't seem to give the expected results for me, so I decided on another approach since I knew it would work and didn't have much time for experimentation. So this was my process:

    Changing a site's URL by recreating the site (downtime required)

    1. Stop old IIS site.
    2. Create new web application in SharePoint, bind to new IP address in IIS.
    3. Apply SSL certificate if appropriate.
    4. Create new site collection for this web application using the blank site template.
    5. Export content using the SharePoint's content migration API (I have a tool which does this, which will shortly be on Codeplex) ensuring all security data is exported. Alternatives to this step include STSADM -O BACKUP and STSADM-O EXPORT. *
    6. Import content into the new site collection, ensuring to include security.
    7. Amend any absolute URLs in .udcx data connection files used by InfoPath.
    8. Republish any InfoPath forms to the new site.
    9. Configure search:
      1. Ensure new URL is a content source.
      2. Update any crawl rules which use absolute URLs.
      3. Update 'authoritative pages' as appropriate.
      4. Start full crawl.
      5. Update scopes.
      6. Go to Site Settings > Site collection administration > Search scopes, add any custom scopes to search dropdown (if using standard search web parts).
      7. Ensure search web parts use relative URLs/do not reference old site URLs.
    10. If a redirect from old URL is required, create new IIS site to implement this:
      1. Create new site in IIS and bind to old IP address.
      2. On 'Home directory' tab, specify content should come from 'A redirection to a URL' and enter the URL.
    11. Ensure DNS/firewalls are configured appropriately for new URL, remembering to allow appropriate time for DNS propagation.
    12. Perform testing.

    * N.B. Between the content migration API and STSADM export, I prefer the former since this allows control over whether object GUIDs are retained (more information in STSADM export, Content Deployment, Content Migration API, Features/Solutions - deployment options compared). STSADM backup/restore is discussed in next section.

    Considerations to this approach

    • When using the content migration API or STSADM backup/restore, the following items are not included - alerts, workflows, recycle bin state or site collection properties. These must be migrated/recreated separately.
    • Regression testing is absolutely required since the site is effectively recreated

    As a way to improve on the first consideration, another option would be STSADM backup/restore (though I've not tried this approach). Notably this method does collect data for the items which the other approaches exclude, however due to the nature of our site, none of these were significant problems.

    So this method was successful, and hopefully this information allows folks to see some of the pros and cons without having to spend the time going through it themselves. However, I also note an approach based on Alternate Access Mappings suggested by Faraz Khan. Since this was only published in the few days before this article it was too late for my scenario, though I'd encourage you to take a look. Note that Faraz also points out considerations such as certain links not being updated to new URL without fix-ups, though this doesn't seem to be a major issue. It does echo my point about there being different things to watch out for with the different approaches, but both methods provide valid techniques for changing a SharePoint site's URL.

    Thursday, 1 November 2007

    Master pages/page layouts deployed as Feature not updating

    Since Deploying master pages and page layouts as a Feature has been the most heavily commented article on this blog, and several of the posters seem to have run into the same problem, I wanted to write a quick post with some more information from my experiences on this.

    So this is something of a non-standard post, feel free to tune out if it doesn't affect you ;-)

    Anyway, I decided to do some more testing to see if either I'd got something wrong or if perhaps I was doing something differently to the people having problems. My test was basically to knock up a publishing site with a master page and page layout (associated with a custom content type as it often would be), then go through the update process. This is what I found:

    • making updates to the files (outside of the 12 folder) and then XCOPYing these to overwrite the files in the 12\TEMPLATE\features\MyFeature\ directory successfully updated the site. No need to deactivate/activate the Feature.
    • using a Solution package to deploy the files (when using Features this is generally what I do since I'm in a farm environment) - again this updated the site correctly when I upgrade the Solution (stsadm -o upgradesolution). This is to be expected since underneath the exact same thing is happening as in the previous test. (However, I also noticed occasionally the directory would complete disappear even after the solution upgrade had completed, or was there but still locked by another process, meaning the files could not be accessed even in Windows Explorer - this is slightly irritating but running the Solution upgrade again always succeeded.)
    • after causing the file to be customized (e.g. modifying or even just checking out with SPD), any subsequent updates to the files via the Feature/Solution did not appear on the site (though further updates in SPD are fine).

    In short, this is all what I expected. Assuming the file has not been customized, anything which updates the copy on the filesystem will cause an update to the site. If it has been customized, updates on the filesystem will not (since the file has now been added to the content database, and the filesystem version is no longer used). If you've not come across this before, Considerations when using Features to deploy SharePoint files - ghosting/unghosting may help.

    So, I'm guessing that if your master pages etc. are not updating when you overwrite the Feature files, it's because the files have become customized somehow. Unfortunately it's not so easy to tell for publishing files - for other files, SharePoint Designer provides a handy blue dot next to the file in it's Explorer view if the file is customized, but alas this doesn't happen for master pages/page layouts. The blue dot can be seen next to the AllItems.aspx file below (click to enlarge):



    Unfortunately this also means reverting to the file on the filesystem is not straightforward either (we can't right-click the file in SPD and select 'Reset to site definition' as we can with other SharePoint files). So this can be a pain if you do want to keep your page layouts referenced from the filesystem (e.g. because performance is critical), but you've ended up in this state. It is possible to revert the files using the API though. I've not needed to do this myself, but the property to check is SPFile.CustomizedPageStatus and if this returns SPCustomizedPageStatus.Customized, then the SPFile.RevertContentStream() method can be used - this should cause SharePoint to henceforth use the version on the filesystem (though note you may lose some updates which had been made after the file was unghosted (customized) - you will need to re-apply these to the filesystem file after the reversion. And remember, don't use SPD for this or you'll be back where you started!)

    So far, so (reasonably) straightforward.

    However, one poster (deelpunt) had an interesting question about updating page layouts with web parts. As far as I can see, updating all page instances to have web parts in web part zones by updating the layouts will not be possible. This is because if web part zones are used, the web part is associated with the page instance rather than the page layout. Indeed, this can be the power of the architecture. It is possible to either:

    • have default web parts added to a zone when a page instance is created from a page layout. This can be done by deploying the page layout using a Feature, and using the AllUsersWebPart tag. This would not affect pages already created however.
    • add web parts to all the pages by adding them directly to the page markup in SPD, rather than in a zone. Of course, this then means the settings for the web part can only be modified by the page designer in SPD, rather than site users.
    • use the API to iterate through all pages in the site to add/modify webparts using SPFile.GetLimitedWebPartManager(). Needless to say, this is the kind of operation which requires a lot of care and planning in production!

    As I've mentioned before, because of these issues the web part zone architecture is often not the best choice for scenarios such as WCM site development, since here we want our changes to apply across all pages which use the layout.

    Hopefully this has been of some use. As always, leave a comment if you've had different experiences to those detailed here, I'd definitely be interested to hear.

    [I also wanted to say sincere apologies to the commenters on the original post (and any others I've been slow in replying to) that it took a couple of weeks for me to come back. Something to do with my project going live and moving house at the same time, hopefully normal service now resumed ;-) ]

    Monday, 29 October 2007

    STSADM export, Content Deployment, Content Migration API, Features/Solutions - deployment options compared

    Back in May I wrote a post titled SharePoint deployment options : Features or Content Deployment?, which discussed some thoughts on what was the "right" way to move assets from development to production (and perhaps environments in between) during the site development process in SharePoint. Having now worked on other projects and consciously used different deployment methods on each, I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that the "right" way to do deployment varies according to circumstances. So I thought what might be useful is an analysis of the whole range of deployment options, with information which might help you decide more easily on how you will complete this crucial step of the process.

    So let's run through the options and their characteristics. Note by the way, that none of the options use 'destructive synchronization', where all content is first deleted before import.

    Using STSADM export/import

    Description:

    Uses STSADM commands to generate a file (export) which can then be transferred to the target for import. One of the simplest ways of moving content from one place to another, although unlikely to be suitable as a continuous deployment mechanism. Examples:

    stsadm.exe -o export -url http://localhost -filename C:\Export.cab -includeusersecurity -versions 4 -overwrite

    stsadm.exe -o import -url http://localhost/sites/newsite -filename C:\Export.cab -includeusersecurity

    Good for:

    • Moving an entire site/web as a one off
    • Quick deployment tests
    • Reparenting webs (can be into a different site collection)

    Considerations:

    • Content on target will be overwritten if already exists
    • Granularity down to web only
    • Object GUIDs are not preserved (so some things will need to be 'fixed up' e.g. anything that references a list by GUID - ListViewWebPart, using lists with InfoPath forms)
    • Not a backup/restore tool - although it's the option which is most like backup/restore, things like alerts, audit trail, recycle bin items, security state, workflow tasks/state are not exported
    • Not transactional

    Using Content Deployment via Central Admin *

    Description:

    Configured via 'Content Deployment paths and jobs' in Central Admin ('/_admin/deployment.aspx'). A path defines the source/target and authentication details, specific jobs define exactly which content should be deployed and how often. Quick deploy functionality allows users with permissions to specify important content which should be deployed more regularly than existing job schedules configured by administrators (quick deploy items are deployed every 15 mins).

    Good for:

    • Moving entire site collections/webs on a scheduled basis e.g. in an authoring/production or authoring/staging/production topology
    • Deploying only incremental changes, e-mail notifications of success/failures
    • Allowing site owners to have some control over content deployment via Quick Deploy
    • Automatically deploying dependencies of content selected for deployment, even if in different site (e.g. page layouts/content types/site columns/referenced images etc.)
    • Automatically transferring the deployment package to the target environment (via HTTP[S])
    • Not transactional

    Considerations:

    • Content on target will be overwritten if already exists
    • Granularity down to web only
    • No differentiation between site content (e.g. pages/images) and site 'infrastructure' (e.g. master pages, page layouts)
    • Object GUIDs are preserved
    • Blank site template should be used for source and destination site collection (see http://support.microsoft.com/kb/923592)
    • Also not a backup/restore tool (see above)

    Using the content migration API *

    Involves writing code which uses the content migration API (known as PRIME) to export then import content - the API is easy to use.

    Good for:

    • Complete flexibility over deployment options
    • Granular control over what gets deployed (down to item level)
    • Ability to preserve object GUIDs (so that list GUIDs do not need to fixed-up)
    • Ability to select options for security, versioning and user roles

    Considerations:

    • Blank site template should be used for source and destination site collection (see http://support.microsoft.com/kb/923592)
    • Not transactional
    • Also not a backup/restore tool (see above)
    • Need development skills to write code

    Using Features/Solutions

    The focus of this blog for several articles. Involves defining XML configuration files which SharePoint uses to add artifacts in the correct way on the target. This can be significantly more complex than simply developing in SharePoint Designer but can allow for better management throughout a solution's lifecycle.

    Good for:

    • Iterative development/deployment
    • Deployment of assemblies and filesystem files (none of the other methods deal with this)
    • Ability to deploy assemblies/filesystem files to all servers in a farm with Solution packages
    • Possibilities for continuous integration

    Considerations:

    • Developer is responsible for evaluating and deploying dependencies (e.g. underlying content types).
    • Updates to content types, list definitions, site columns etc. deployed via a Feature must be done with the API - modifying original Feature files and then reprovisioning is not supported
    • Can be very time-consuming due to lack of assistance from current tools

    * Some additional notes on using Content Deployment or content migration APIs:

    - appropriate Features will automatically be activated on the target, but they must be present (i.e. installed) for content deployment to work (N.B. publishing feature should not be enabled on target for first deployment)

    - using Content Deployment or content migration API with RetainObjectIdentity option should not be combined with STSADM -export/import, since the latter will allocate new IDs!

    So clearly there can be a few aspects to consider in choosing how to go about deployment for your project. In many scenarios where Features/Solutions aren't the most appropriate option, I favor using the content migration API, mainly due to the flexibility which isn't provided in any of the other options. Of course it does mean writing code, but as I mentioned last time, I'll soon share the mini-app I wrote so you don't have to!

    Some useful references: