wilbywilson Posted July 2, 2014 Report post Posted July 2, 2014 I had a thread going the other day on this forum, which discussed a bug with superseding applications that were referenced in an optional Task Sequence. I want to report that I think this bug may extend beyond that scope. I'm working on an Office 2013 application, and I want it to supersede Office 2010. I added in the supersedence settings earlier today, and targeted an "optional" deployment to a small set of machines. I clicked on the Office 2013 application manually (via the Software Center) on a couple of machines to test it, but I also noticed on a couple of other machines that in the Software Center, the Office 2013 application was showing as "Past Due - will be updated". This is an *optional* deployment, and I certainly don't want machines to automatically upgrade. I want this type of deployment to be manually triggered, at the end user's time preference. I believe that Office 2013 would have tried to deploy itself at the next maintenance window to these machines (that had Office 2010 installed), had I not just removed the supersedence settings from the application. One point of debate are the proper choices in the actual supersedence menu. Obviously you choose the old application that you want to supersede, but there is also a selection for "Replacement Deployment Type." Here, you can select either "Do not replace", or you can select the new application. I chose the new Office 2013 application based on another blog I was reading, but perhaps "Do not replace" would have resulted in different behavior (not "forcing" existing clients with Office 2010 to update themselves at the next maintenance window?) Does anyone have in-depth experience with superseding applications? What is the difference between "Do not replace", and selecting the new application? Can supersedence work with "optional" deployments? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
