When submitting Excel add-in to the office store. Which version of the Excel API should be referenced in the manifest file?
We have experienced being rejected because we didn’t refer to the newest version of the Excel API.
But if our Excel add-in supports an older version of the API. Shouldn't we be referencing this?
There are several aspects to the versioning of the Office.js library.
First, there is versioning of the actual JavaScript source files. Fortunately, this part is pretty simple: you always want the latest and greatest of the production Office.js, which is conveniently obtainable through our CDN: https://appsforoffice.microsoft.com/lib/1/hosted/Office.js. The files are also shipped as a NuGet package to allow corporate firewalled development, but the NuGet may lag a few weeks behind the CDN -- and in any case, any Store-bound add-in is required to reference the CDN location. So, in terms of Office.js versions, there isn't really versioing there: there is simply the one and only evergreen, frequently-updated, always-back-compatible, Store-required CDN version.
(While on the subject of CDNs: we also have a beta CDN, available at https://appsforoffice.microsoft.com/lib/beta/hosted/Office.js. This one is great to testing newly implemented-but-not-yet-officially-stamped-as-done features, which you'll find in our Open Specs: http://dev.office.com/reference/add-ins/openspec. However, any new APIs therein should be considered as strictly "beta", and they may well be renamed, re-grouped, or postoponed -- so your app should not rely on them, as we explicitly reserve the right to break pack-compat on the beta branch. An API is not "done" until it is listed in IntelliSense ande Documentation as complete, until it's available on the Production CDN, *and until its isSetSupported returns true -- more on that momentarily).
The more interesting bit for versioning are the actual API capabilities that are offered by each host. The Office.js library will have the latest JS code to be able to run them, but older hosts might not be able to support some of the functionality. For example, if you look at https://dev.office.com/reference/add-ins/requirement-sets/excel-api-requirement-sets, you will see that the 2016 wave of Excel APIs -- grouped under the "ExcelApi" requirement set -- has had three versions to date: 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3. ExcelApi 1.1 was what shipped with Office 2016 RTM in September 2015; 1.2 shipped in early March 2016; and 1.3 shipped just recently, and is in the process of being rolled out to the CDN. Each API set version has a corresponding Office host version that supports this API set (for most APIs, there have to be both JS and host-side changes; it's fairly rare that something can be a purely-JS addition). The version numbers are listed in the table, and there are links below the table to find a mapping from build numbers to dates.
Each of the API set versions contain a number of fairly large features, as well as incremental improvements to existing features. The topic for each requirment set, such as the link above, will provide a detailed listing of each of those features. And as you're programming, if you are using the JavaScript or TypeScript IntelliSense, you should be able to see the API versions for each of your APIs displayed as part of the IntelliSense:
You can use the requirement set in one of two ways. You can declare in the manifest that "I need API set ExcelApi 1.2, or else my add-in doesn't work at all" -- and that's fine, but then of course you aren't able to service older hosts, and so your add-in won't even show up there. Alternatively, if you add-in could sorta work in a 1.1 environment, but you want to light-up additional functionality on newer hosts that support it, you can use the manifest to declare only your minimal API sets that you need (e.g., ExcelApi 1.1), and then do runtime checks for higher version numbers via the isSetSupported API. Neat ways to get environment (i.e. Office version) has a very detailed explanation of this isSetSupported API-checking.
Hope this helps!
Related
I have an o365 addin that works as expected on click 2 run versions of Outlook, however, there is a customer that has a MSI installation of Outlook 2016 that experiences inconsistencies.
I would like to obtain a copy of Outlook 2016 MSI so that I can do some testing locally.
It may be an issue with centralized deployment but would like to do some validation.
I've done web searches and contacted MS support. All things lead to MSI versions no longer being available.
May be the following will help you.
Workaround:
To get the MSI versions either you can remote their machine or get the MSI copy from customer (may not be feasible solution)
Understanding API requirement sets for Outlook.
I believe when the Addin was developed, you might be aware of the API requirement set. The following will be your case
All Outlook APIs belong to the Mailbox requirement set. The Mailbox
requirement set has versions, and each new set of APIs that are
released belongs to a higher version of the set. Not all Outlook
clients will support the newest set of APIs when they are released,
but if an Outlook client declares support for a requirement set, it
will support all the APIs in that requirement set.
For example:
if you specify requirement set version 1.3, the add-in will not show up in any Outlook client that doesn't support a minimum version of 1.3.
You can use the following code : isSetSupported property to check whether the addin is supported or not
if (Office.context.requirements.isSetSupported('Mailbox', 1.3) === true) {
// Perform actions.
}
else {
// Provide alternate flow/logic.
}
official reference:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/office/dev/add-ins/reference/requirement-sets/outlook-api-requirement-sets
From the above screenshot you can easily figure out which add in will work on which version.
Hope it will give some idea of how to solve your problem.
I am checking out the documentation on IBM Cognitive Services and have come across two ways of connecting to my existing workspace.
Version 1
Version 2
My question is which of them is the one that needs to be used. They both appear to work but I am not sure which one to go with. Is there another API that is latest perhaps?
The latest version API will be on the release notes and the API reference.
https://www.ibm.com/watson/developercloud/doc/conversation/release-notes.html
Using an earlier version number will disable later features, but any workspace created with a later version may not be backward compatible, and results may be unpredictable.
There is currently no way to create earlier workspace structures once there has been an update to the version. But if you have older workspaces, they will still remain compatible.
I am working on Adobe CQ. I created 2-3 versions(1.2,1.2,1.3) for a particular page in my author instance. Now I tried to package my content page and installed it in another instance. I couldn't see the versions of the page which I installed in another instance.
Can anyone help me out doing this?? I want to migrate my content pages along with their versions from one CQ instance to another??
We are in the same situation. You can extract prior version details using the packaging approach, but you will be precluded from reloading them in due to the new Oak security model. The next issue is that you would need to extract and transform the data, and then reinsert due to the node ID's potentially differing, especially if you are using partial data sets to extract.
Where we have gotten to, and are proving now, is to use the new migration tool to move content from instance to instance, which purportedly has a version extract tool. I will update details here when we get our results back.
UPDATE:
We have tested the CRX2OAK migration tool, and it indeed does move versions across. Using the tool, you can specify filters to only migrate a subset of content, which will then drag the version details across as well.
It seems this approach works quite well for both single tenancy and multi tenancy approaches as it used to using a package for content.
Unfortunately, it can't be used as a portable backup system, as it is an instance to instance solution. It does, however, work well for blue/green deployment strategies.
Versions are stored by path '/jcr:system/jcr:versionStorage' in AEM.
To transfer pages with their versions just create a package with filters for content which you want to move and the version storage path as well, download package and install in other AEM.
If anyone comes across this question like me, here is the summarised answer:
You can use crx2oak utility available from link below to migrate pages and page version across instances:
https://repo.adobe.com/nexus/content/groups/public/com/adobe/granite/crx2oak/
This is a powerful utility with multiple uses (especially in upgrades) as documented in links below:
https://docs.adobe.com/docs/en/aem/6-2/deploy/upgrade/using-crx2oak.html
https://jackrabbit.apache.org/oak/docs/migration.html
The source and destination repositories need to be offline while running this utility so best to plan ahead for this type of migration.
HTH
When working with Google Cloud Endpoints in a appengine project (eclipse based), some files that describe the api are automatically generated every time the endpoint is edited and for every version.
The files are *-v1.api, *-v1-rest.discovery and *-v1-rpc.discovery (the version number may change) and are placed in WEB-INF.
¿Should these files be committed to source control?
My impression is that if the files are automatically generated, they will always be available and there is no need to track them.
Even if I add more versions of the endpoint in the future, I need to keep all those versions for backwards compatibility so all .api and .discovery files will also be generated for all the versions.
Personally, I don't version control (or even worry about backing up) any generated files. I only worry about source and published binaries. And in theory you don't need the binary either because you should be able to recreate the binary from those source files.
Can someone recommend a source control product that does all of the following:
Seamless integration into VS 2008 Pro
Will allow me to create different "editions" of a program (like "express" and "pro") - maybe with branching?
Will allow me to track changes for specific client requests. Say I have four clients, 2 on express, 2 on pro. I would be able to create specific, customized changes for all clients while still maintaining a singular codebase.
I'm not sure if something like VisualSVN can handle this, but there must be a product out there.
Virtually every source control will satisfy the #2 and #3 requirement with branches.
For #1 it's more tricky. If you really want a Seamless integration (capital S) then Team Foundation Server is your only choice. (It's very expensive)
Otherwise virtually all the major source control systems will have some sort of VS plugin, but the plugin usually doesn't work very well.
The two most popular free source control systems are:
Subversion
git
The best way to create different additions of your software using the same code in all of the different versions it to use pre-processor directives to conditionally compile your software based of flags that you set.
For information on conditional compilation please see the following links:
.NET: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/9ae6e432%28VS.71%29.aspx
Java: http://weblogs.java.net/blog/schaefa/archive/2005/01/how_to_do_condi_1.html
C++: http://www.devarticles.com/c/a/Cplusplus/C-plus-plus-Preprocessor-The-Code-in-the-Middle/3/
I hope this answers your question I use this alot when developing different version of applications for different platforms.
An example of this is an application that I developed in c# for both a server and mobile device implementation. Each had different ways of calling functions in .NET libraries but the logic was the same so I used preprocessor conditional compilation to compile to correct code for each platform but leave the logic intact.
From experience you only need integration with Visual Studio if you need to check out the file before editing it (a-la SourceSafe) and the file is read-only until then.
Having used SourceSafe I went on to using SVN and absolutely never looked back. Then I switched to git and again never looked back on SVN or Sourcesafe.
I can't comment on Team Foundation source control or Mercurial, I've never used those. At this stage I would recommend git over SVN as it's more suited to working with a single source tree that has minor changes between lots of branches. You can do the same thing with SVN but found the process of switching the working copy to another process painful.
Team Foundation Server provides the best seamless integration to VS 2008, but of course its not free (i agree that its very expensive)
have you tried using AnkhSVN? its got a pretty good integration for VS 2008 and SVN. so far it gives me the VS-SVN integration that I need, so you might want to check it and see if it fits your needs.
you can use TortoiseSVN, but I suggest installing CollabNet's SVN server, because AnkhSVN integrates seamlessly with it, plus you dont have to worry about major installations
It's only three months until VS 2010 is in final release (March 22, 2010). For MSDN subscribers, TFS will be integrated into Visual Studio (all levels except Express). MSDN subscriptions that include Visual Studio (any level) will include TFS with a one-seat license. TFS 2010 will run on Vista or Windows 7. SharePoint is no longer required, but you still need it if you want 100% of TFS features, like reporting.
It's all available now in beta; I'm running TFS on my laptop.