You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Use Case 1: Identical copies of MsiProperty elements, such as the following, are used in many different Fragments which include MsiPackage elements. (I assume that this applies to any MxxPackage.). In some cases there are groups of MsiProperty elements which are copied and used for similar types of applications (services) defined in multiple MsiPackages.
Use Case 2: Based on advice to avoid using MSI language transforms with Burn driven deployment, I have multiple MsiPackage fragments which are identical, except for the localized path to the msi package (and a localized specific identifier). The MsiProperties are repeated identically in each MsiPackage fragment.
In the above situations it seems like creating groups of MsiProperty(s) and using references to those groups, or a reference to a single MsiProperty used in many places would be a useful construct.
Originally opened by phogland
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Use Case 1: Identical copies of MsiProperty elements, such as the following, are used in many different Fragments which include MsiPackage elements. (I assume that this applies to any MxxPackage.). In some cases there are groups of MsiProperty elements which are copied and used for similar types of applications (services) defined in multiple MsiPackages.
Use Case 2: Based on advice to avoid using MSI language transforms with Burn driven deployment, I have multiple MsiPackage fragments which are identical, except for the localized path to the msi package (and a localized specific identifier). The MsiProperties are repeated identically in each MsiPackage fragment.
In the above situations it seems like creating groups of MsiProperty(s) and using references to those groups, or a reference to a single MsiProperty used in many places would be a useful construct.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: