I would like to integrate into my CI/CD pipeline a requirement set condition.
I'm developing an Office.js Excel addin and I would like to track client compatibility.
There is a way to inspect code to detect the maximum value of requirement set?
The codebase is not so small, and I want to keep an eye on client compatibility.
Thanks
Good question! There is no tools for such tasks, developers are responsible for checking the requirement set before using a particular method or property in the code of Office add-ins.
Sounds like a subject for a feature suggestion. You can post or vote for an existing feature request on Tech Community where they are considered when the Office dev team goes through the planning process.
As far as I know, there is no automated way to see what Req Sets are used by your code. That would be a valuable tool. Consider suggesting it at Microsoft 365 Developer Platform Ideas.
Related
In Microsoft Word, there is an option to track changes/view revisions pertaining to a specific document. I would like to know if there is any API to access those changes via an Office Add-In.
Also, via this link, the consensus is that there is no such API available. But since, this is an old post, we would like to know if the situation has changed.
Furthermore, according to this link, there is the presence of Reviewer object for VBA shown. However, is it valid for Office Add-In? If yes, Is it supported in other programming languages like Node.js. If it does, are there any code samples available?
The functionality you are asking about is still not supported in the JavaScript API for Word. Please make sure to add this request (or vote for an existing one) in our user voice channel. thanks.
Previously when provisioning list, libraries, site columns, content types, list definitions etc in SharePoint I typically used SharePoint features, deployed via a WSP - or used PowerShell scripts. This meant I had a package that could be deployed to DEV / TEST / PROD.
I'm working with SharePoint within Office 365 and unsure on the best way to provision lists / libraries / features within SharePoint.
Options:
No Code Sandboxed Solutions
Trying to avoid using these as the information from Microsoft on whether they are deprecated is flaky - however sandboxed solutions would allow me to deploy features with list definitions etc. I know sandboxed solutions with c# are definitely deprecated, but the info around no code solutions is poor.
Apps
I know apps can provision at both the app and host web level, but creating lists, libraries etc using the CSOM seems like a lot of effort and a step backwards.
PowerShell
The SP Online PowerShell is nowhere near as powerful as on-prem SP. I can provision site collections through this, but not lists or libraries...
I'm keen to know how other developers are deploying to Office 365, specifically around provisioning sites with specific list definitions, libraries, content types and so on...
Thanks
Microsoft did clarify the position on No Code Sandbox solutions - http://blogs.msdn.com/b/sharepointdev/archive/2014/01/14/deprecation-of-custom-code-in-sandboxed-solutions.aspx
Also if you are looking at using Powershell to deploy then you might want to go down the route of using CSOM from within PowerShell - SharePoint Client Browser for SharePoint 2013 is good for setting up a session also very good for viewing the content of a 365 tenant - http://spcb.codeplex.com/
I have been using code based provision for almost two years without any issues at all.
Server side model works just fine, CSOM has some limitation but stil cool one and JSOM could deliver the same feature set as both CSOM and SSOM, sorta 95% :)
PowerShell is not the best option as it hard to integrate into CI, put some unit testing and regressions.
As you mentioned, this is "step back", but if only you don't have any framework or foundation for that. My libraries are internal one, but there is SPGenesis at codeplex and SPMeta2.
As community don't really care, need or with such libraries for provisioning (yep, let's face it), there are much such libraries at all, but there are lots of "MVP" samples sorta "hello world" level.
Finally, what I would suggest is to invest your time and effort in code based provision.
This is a future, that's it ;)
UPD
Struggling with SharePoint's API inconsistency, bugs, "by-design" behaviour, unaffordable amount of time to write, support and upgrade WSP packages and XML, a team of passionate SharePoint professionals decided to come up with robust, testable and repeatable way to deploy such artifacts like fields, content types, libraries, pages and many more.
Enjoy and let us know how it goes.
SPMeta2 at GitHub
SPMeta2 at Nuget
SPMeta2 Documentation Wiki
SPMeta2 Bugtracker
We are currently in the process of drawing up a solution for an existing client, creating a number of eServices. The client currently have MOSS 2007. The proposed solution is to use MOSS as the launching pad for the eServices…
The requirement involves drawing up several online forms which provide registration facilities as well as facilitating a workflow of some sort. I have been told that the proposed solution requires complex web forms.
Most are complex forms with parent child details that have multiple windows. The proposed solution is to do some bespoke development, developing ASP .NET forms. These forms would be deployed under the _layouts folder of the current MOSS portal, inheriting the master page design on the current site.
I have been told that this approach make development and deployment more simple, as well has having ‘complete integration’ with MOSS.
My questions are:
Is this the best way to leverage SharePoint – it seems like the proposed solution is not leveraging MOSS at all..! I thought perhaps utilizing Web Parts would be better, but I have been told that this is more complex and developing more smarter intuitive UI is more difficult. Is this really the case? If not, what should be the recommended approach?
We will be utilizing Ultimus as the workflow engine. However, I have been recommended K2 Workflows. Anyone used both/have any opinions on either?
Many thanks in advance!
Kind Regards,
If they have MOSS 2007 Enterprise, you might consider if web rendered InfoPath forms can meet your needs for "complex web forms". When it comes down to it, probably all of these technologies can meet the neeed it is just a matter of what skill sets you and your customer have and how that will facilitate keeping this solution up to date.
Asim, what they propose is a possible solution. They can however provide the same functionality by making use of webparts. With the details you are giving us that isn't really possible to decide which option would be easier. I used both approaches in the same project depending on the requirements of each functionality.
I can understand that it doesn't seem like they are leveraging MOSS, but they actually are building pages within the context of MOSS.
I haven't really heard about Ultimus, I did use K2 in a proof of concept and I was quite happy with it. Then again, choosing the right workflow solution depends on your requirements.
I know next to nothing about SharePoint, so maybe this isn't something you can/should do, or maybe it's something completely trivial, I don't know, but we have a custom in-house help desk application at work, and I'm wondering if it can be integrated into our help desk SharePoint site somehow?
I really don't know what's possible with SharePoint, so any ideas or thoughts on this matter would be appreciated.
The short answer is yes but the amount of time required to make this work will be directly related to your flexibility / needs. Would you be satisfied with default SharePoint lists / forms? Do you need to retrieve and update data hosted in an external source? Do you really need this integrated with SharePoint or simply hosted under the same URL?
I've found that SharePoint can do anything but the time required to make it meet the needs of a demanding/inflexible business user is sometimes significant.
There is also the issue of doing right or simply making it work. Making it work buys you some time initially but you can easily dig yourself a very deep hole that is difficult to escape. My suggestion is to keep the solution as simple and maintainable as possible.
Pretty much anything that can go on a webform can go in a webpart - with obvious complications, but yes it would work. Look into webpart development.
I would try to stick to the features that SharePoint is already offering you. You can achieve a lot by using them, and enriching them with a few simple workflows.
If you want to add some workflow logic to your solution, then try to avoid the designer workflows, since they have some issues when it comes to deployment(in short: you cant). So even if it looks easier to design them in Designer, you will pay a price later when you want to deploy them to production (You have a staging/development enviroment?)
In general I would also agree with mayos answer
Anything is possible...but check out the MSDN reference for integrating with SharePoint:
Integration with Office SharePoint Server
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm trying to wrap my head around SharePoint. Why is it good? Why is it bad?
At a glance it appears to offer some incredible collaboration tools. However, the cost looks astronomical and it seems to be rigid & difficult to customize.
To those who've worked with SharePoint; please describe something good and something bad about it.
Pros:
Document management is its most well-known
function and integrates extremely
well with Office 2007.
Create group calendars that can be
overlayed onto your personal Outlook
and managed on the web.
Notifications in response to certain
actions on the group website
Wiki-type functionality with full
integration into the Office stack.
Full database backend which gives
you the reliability and safety of a
true RDBMS.
Extremely customizable if you choose
to develop custom websites using
ASP.NET (not the built-in wizard/gui
editor).
Form-data collection
Cons:
Freebie version is somewhat limited
on customization.
How to handle multiple editors to a
single file is not obvious.
Workflow for offline editing of
documents is non-obvious.
Very steep learning curve to use it
the right way.
Getting people to use it is like
getting people to go to the dentist.
Out-of-the-box templates don't do a
lot.
Customizing without writing code
really limits your options.
Integration with older versions of
office is ugly
Mac integration is non-existant (has
this changed recently?)
It has pretty good Office 2007 integration. As an example, Excel understands when you have a file checked out and will let you check it in (with comments) when you close it. The document management features simplistic version control (although it's not required; you can go with a single version for each file).
In SharePoint, everything is essentially a list internally and it's very easy to create a custom one. On a related note, I haven't used either yet, but it supposedly works well with workflows and InfoPath.
On the downside, it's pretty much a resource beast. It requires multiple machines with powerful specs, particularly if you want to "really" use it for document management and to be the backbone of your intranet/internet site. It scales to an extent, but it's not pretty from my vantage point.
Customizing it presents it's own challenges. You really need people focused on it full time, as both administration and customization require their own impressive learning curves.
Lastly, some of the out of the box parts are poorly implemented. The wiki is a prime example; it's basically useless in my opinion. So one thing to keep in mind is that some may consider SharePoint as a whole package as "best in class" (not saying I do!), its individual features often are not.
Good
Out of the box, it offers a ton of functionality and power, even for the stock web parts. Just creating a library of documents that anyone can open/edit/upload to is simple...even for those non-web-savvy amongst us.
Bad
Pretty much everything else.
The "Discussion Board" is a glorified Outlook email chain.
The disconnect between achieving similar results in SharePoint Designer 2007 and using the web interface are jarring and annoying
Attempting to customize the look and feel of a SharePoint site usually ends in complete disaster. Especially with WSS 3.0.
The nickel & diming scheme between the WSS 3.0 and MOSS 2007 tiers is absolutely painful; WSS 3.0 is just barely functional enough to be extremely frustrating to use
Changing MS styles is almost impossible due to their horribly-laid-out and obnoxiously large CSS file.
IT IS 2009...GET RID OF THE TABLES FOR NON-TABULAR DATA ALREADY!
It's a beast to use. And handing two complete rebranding projects for two totally different areas of the company is driving me to the point of a nervous breakdown. Especially when opening the core.css file occasionally results in all the styles I've redefined getting reset to the defaults. Without anything done by me other than just OPENING the file. And there is no ability to undo these changes.
Good thing: Great communication tool. Instead of sending out a company wide email you can post an announcement to your SharePoint site. Users can subscribe to an RSS feed of the announcements or have a email alert sent to them when the list is updated.
Bad thing: Error messages displayed on a SharePoint site are generic and the link to help resolve the issue rarely is of any help.
Good:
It can be a great collaboration tool. Beginning developing for sharepoint is simple, assuming you are familar with ASP.NET webparts.
Bad:
The development lifecycle isn't fully implemented. There are no built-in facilities for testing, among other things.
SharePoint is evolving and becoming a better collaboration tool for Microsoft Office environments. It plays well in a small to medium sized business setting. It is critical to implement “best practices” on setup; otherwise it will quickly become a nightmare to maintain and to use.
For “best practices” here are two books that I recommend for SharePoint 2007:
Essential SharePoint 2007
Sharepoint 2007
A lot of the cool things in Sharepoint are avaialable in Windows Sharepoint Services 3.0, which is free with windows server 2003/2008. All you need extra is a license for SQL Server 2000 and later, which most mirosoft shops have. In WSS you can do document management, workflows, custom sites, blogs, wiki's, etc.
If you need Excel Services, Forms Server, CMS, or some of the other MOSS features, then that's another thing. And yes, it does cost a lot of money, but it' cheaper than doing it from scratch in most cases.
Pluses:
- Great object model.
- A lot of good features just come out of the box.
Minuses:
- Steap learning curve to do things the right way.
- It's very easy to hang yourself by doing things the wrong way.
- Debugging and deployment is about as pleasurable as root canal.
good :
A lot of things can be done. Wokflowks, InfoPath forms, Excel Services, Business Data Catalogs and etc.
Bad :
You won't be able to do these described easily. Must have sharepoint administrative and development skills for good solutions that don't improve quickly.
If you have a license for Microsoft Server 2003 then you can install the standalone version of Sharepoint for FREE!
Download Sharepoint
The install is very simple when using the internal database.
Microsoft Office Sharepoint Designer 2007 is a must have for any customization.
I have created a couple Company Intranets using Sharepoint and have been very pleased with its features.
Microsoft Office 2007 interfaces nicely with sharepoint.
I have found Sharepoint to be very powerful and easy to learn. There are lots of people developing sites using sharepoint. The level of customization is awesome. The simplest customization is done in your browser, the next level is using Microsoft Sharepoint Designer 2007, and finally using Visual Studio to create new apps(webparts).