Create and config IIS Web Site without deploying a package

(kp-tseng) #1

Hi,

When we deploy our application as an IIS web application, we will use “Deploy an IIS Web Site” to create both IIS web site and IIS web application.
The deployment steps look like:

Step Step Name Package ID Deployment Type
Step 1 Create Web Site DummyPackage IIS Web Site
Step 2 Create Web Application ApplicationPackage IIS Web Application

In step 1, what we want is to create and config an IIS web site, we use a dummy empty package as a workaround since in “Deploy an IIS Web Site” a package ID is required.

Is there a way that we can still use the “Deploy an IIS Web Site” to create and config a web site without using this kind of workaround? Since when we create a release, the DummyPackage is always there and creates confusion.

Thanks.

0 Likes

(Dalmiro Grañas) #2

Hi,

Thanks for reaching out! Its not possible with the IIS steps introduced in 3.4.7 to create a site without deploying a package first. Its not a bad idea though, so I went ahead and created a uservoice sugestion for it: https://octopusdeploy.uservoice.com/forums/170787-general/suggestions/17031511-allow-new-iis-step-to-just-create-iis-resources-wi . If you can drop by and add some votes, that’ll be great.

The DummyPackage workaround its actually not half bad. But it might be more elegant to use the already existing IIS steps in our library instead. If you search for “IIS” you’ll find all of them, including the one to create the website alone: https://library.octopusdeploy.com/

Thanks,
Dalmiro

0 Likes

(kp-tseng) #3

Hi Dalmiro,

Thanks for creating a uservoice for this. Before 3.4.7, we did use the step templates in library to create web site and web application. However, the templates in library are not like “Deploy an IIS Web Site” with a more friendly UI and also allowing us to specify more settings in IIS, such as multiple IIS bindings. So, that’s why we used “Deploy an IIS Web Site” from 3.4.7.

Thanks,
Kai-Ping

0 Likes

(Dalmiro Grañas) #4

Hi Kai-Ping,

That’s actually a very good argument in favor of that uservoice. I added it as a note in the uservoice suggestion.

Thanks,
Dalmiro

0 Likes

(system) closed #6
0 Likes