<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Checking if BizTalk binding file is up-to date during deployment</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.richardhallgren.com/checking-if-biztalk-binding-file-is-up-to-date-during-deployment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.richardhallgren.com/checking-if-biztalk-binding-file-is-up-to-date-during-deployment/</link>
	<description>.NET, BizTalk and integration focused scribbles</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Jun 2010 22:09:55 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: patrick wellink</title>
		<link>http://www.richardhallgren.com/checking-if-biztalk-binding-file-is-up-to-date-during-deployment/comment-page-1/#comment-425</link>
		<dc:creator>patrick wellink</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:03:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.richardhallgren.com/checking-if-biztalk-binding-file-is-up-to-date-during-deployment-2/#comment-425</guid>
		<description>“- What!? If fixed that configuration issue in production last week and now it back …”

If it was Fixed in production, the fix should have been communicated back to the programmers so they can fix the bindings....

If they don&#039;t communicate it back they cant complain later. 

Although i do agree that your post is usefull it should never happen.

In my opinion the BizTalk administrators should be aware of this problem and should understand that if they &#039;Fix&#039; something, they can inform the programmers to fix it forever or do the fix everytime the port is re-deployed........</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>“- What!? If fixed that configuration issue in production last week and now it back …”</p>
<p>If it was Fixed in production, the fix should have been communicated back to the programmers so they can fix the bindings&#8230;.</p>
<p>If they don&#8217;t communicate it back they cant complain later. </p>
<p>Although i do agree that your post is usefull it should never happen.</p>
<p>In my opinion the BizTalk administrators should be aware of this problem and should understand that if they &#8216;Fix&#8217; something, they can inform the programmers to fix it forever or do the fix everytime the port is re-deployed&#8230;&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rajesh</title>
		<link>http://www.richardhallgren.com/checking-if-biztalk-binding-file-is-up-to-date-during-deployment/comment-page-1/#comment-420</link>
		<dc:creator>Rajesh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:31:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.richardhallgren.com/checking-if-biztalk-binding-file-is-up-to-date-during-deployment-2/#comment-420</guid>
		<description>Richard,

Good Post on dealing with Binding file issues. W.R.T binding files, I often find some difficulty whenever I add or update receive locations/send ports on my dev machine and grab only those changes and deploy further on to TST/PROD machines. Did you feel the same or have some better solution to deal with this?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Richard,</p>
<p>Good Post on dealing with Binding file issues. W.R.T binding files, I often find some difficulty whenever I add or update receive locations/send ports on my dev machine and grab only those changes and deploy further on to TST/PROD machines. Did you feel the same or have some better solution to deal with this?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
