Exactly as Miguel said.

@Armeen

It would be great if it were that simple. Unfortunately, the PowerClient creates the shortcuts and these cannot be changed. A solution would be to adapt the PowerClient project and start a build again. BUT, as already described, we are not allowed to start another build for a productive version, we have to use the last released test version.

The way you could do it without rebuilding is have the build shortcut configured for the production app/URL. For the test app/URL, you just create your own shortcut that points to the URL of the test app. It will pop up a browser and that can be a little annoying, but it is only test app for short period of time.

Hi Reto;

Thank you for your insight. Yes, the process can be the same but you can setup as many test environments between Dev & Prod as your organization requires. ;-)

Regards ... Chris

Hi Miguel;

What I've seen over my decades in IT, that's normally the way most IT shops use that technique. The development team does a production "candidate" build & does a quick "sanity" test on the App. From there, the production candidate is copied "as is" to the QA environment. The only change would be to a control file that allows the App to connect to the QA DB. If the App passes QA, then the production candidate App is copied "as is" from the QA environment to the Systems Integration test environment. Again, the only change there is the control file that directs the App to connect to an SI based DB. If the App passes SI testing, it's then copied to the User Acceptance test environment with the appropriate control file changes for DB connection in UA. Once the App passes UAT, it's copied into production. At NO time is the app ever recompiled as this could easily break its integrity. If the App fails to pass any these environments, it's sent back to development where it's fixed & recompiled as another production candidate & the cycle starts again over to QA.

There is no reason why PowerClient or PowerServer Apps should not follow the same SDLC IMHO. HTH

Regards... Chris

HI Chris,

Yes, I agree with all that, but since the exe is already in different folders, I don't see the need to name the executable differently or maybe I didn't fully understand they the OP works with this.

regards