Modifying Asset Package directly vs using D_Rename Table

[BryanMay531]

Can Modifying Asset Package directly be done for adding asset types and renaming domains and domain values or do some thing need to be done  using D_Rename Table

[RobertKrisher · Accepted solution]

Adding new items to the asset package must be done by hand. While you can manually rename existing domains/vales in the asset package I've always recommended using the rename table. This makes it very easy to track where you've made modifications to the base model. In theory, if you selected a configuration that included a value in the D_Rename table this could lead to a situation where your change could get overwritten, but I don't believe any of the foundations include configurations that would do this.

[BryanMay531]

Great!  thank you,

follow up question:  what do you mean by :if you selected a configuration that... (in the last sentence of your reply)?

[RobertKrisher · Accepted solution]

The D_Rename table allows you to select different sets of aliases when you deploy an asset package. If you were to rename something that was referenced by that table, and then select one of those rename options, it would likely either fail or overwrite your renamed item with the name specified in the rename option you selected.

[BryanMay531]

Thanks,  that helps a lot!!!!!!

[JohnAlsup · Accepted solution]

As Robert states, adding asset types or domain codes and descriptions is easy.  Changing an Asset Type name or code is very risky and will probably fail on apply.  Changing domain names can be risky if the domain is assigned to a network attribute, so for changing names, I would use the D_Rename option.

[BryanMay531]

Thanks John!