# US 2013/0159691 A1 · Processing framework for generating pre-configuration packages > Agents: this data is available as JSON from the patentgrep API and MCP server — see https://patentgrep.com/llms.txt - Number: US 2013/0159691 A1 - Document ID: US20130159691A1 - Status: Published application - Kind: A1 - Application number: 13/328,119 - Filed: 2011-12-16 - Published: 2013-06-20 - Earliest claimed: 2011-12-16 - Assignees: Sap SE - Inventors: Peter NEUER; Matthias GRESSLER - Web page: https://patentgrep.com/patent/US20130159691A1 ## CPC - G06F 8/61: Installation - G06F: ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING (computer systems based on specific computational models G06N) ## Abstract Reference packages may include a self-contained set of implementation tasks, that when executed at a computing system, provide the computing system with a particular functionality. Implementation tasks in a reference package may be compared to an existing configuration of a computing system to determine which of the implementation tasks have already been executed/installed in the computing system and which have not. Implementation tasks that have not been installed may be selected for inclusion in a final target package. Implementation tasks that have been partially installed or installed differently in the existing computing system from the implementation tasks may have secondary tasks added to them in the final target package. Each secondary task may enable a change to the configuration of the existing system to resolve the configuration inconsistency between the existing configuration in the computing system and the configuration specified in a corresponding implementation task. ## Claims ### Claim 1 A computer-implemented method comprising: identifying a series of sequential implementation tasks in a reference package providing a self-contained functionality to a computing system; comparing, using a processing device, each of the implementation tasks in sequence to an existing configuration of the computing system; including in a target package each implementation task that is not already installed according to the comparing; and adding a secondary task in the target package to each implementation task conflicting with the existing configuration according to the comparing, the secondary task specifying a procedure for changing the existing configuration to resolve the conflict. ### Claim 2 (depends on 1) The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: when executing the secondary task during an execution of the target package at the computing system, launching an existing standard configuration dialog enabling a user to manually specify a change to at least one setting in the existing configuration identified as conflicting with the respective implementation task; implementing the manually specified change at the computing system; and resuming execution of subsequent tasks in the target package. ### Claim 3 (depends on 1) The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the secondary task replaces a section of the existing configuration conflicting with the respective implementation task with that specified in the respective implementation task. ### Claim 4 (depends on 1) The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the secondary task specifies a conflict resolving configuration change to the existing configuration obtained from an implementation object. ### Claim 5 (depends on 1) The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the secondary task replaces its respective implementation task in the target package. ### Claim 6 (depends on 1) The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: identifying a criteria associated with an implementation task; and performing a procedure associated with the identified criteria before including the implementation task in the target package that is not already installed according to the comparing. ### Claim 7 (depends on 6) The computer-implemented method of claim 6, wherein the implementation task is not installed in the target package responsive to the procedure indicating that the implementation task is not to be installed. ### Claim 8 (depends on 1) The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising, in an upgrade situation where at least one implementation task is already installed in the existing configuration according to the comparing, removing from the target package each implementation task associated with a criterion designating the implementation task as not relevant for upgrading. ### Claim 9 (depends on 1) The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein during the comparing each implementation task specifying a configuration that differs from the existing configuration is identified as conflicting with the existing configuration and as not already installed in the existing configuration. ### Claim 10 (depends on 9) The computer-implemented method of claim 9, wherein during the comparing each implementation task specifying a configuration that contains an additional configuration setting to those already included in the existing configuration is identified as conflicting with the existing configuration. ### Claim 11 (depends on 9) The computer-implemented method of claim 9, wherein during the comparing each implementation task specifying a configuration that contains a different configuration setting from that in the existing configuration is identified as conflicting with the existing configuration. ### Claim 12 (depends on 1) The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein during the comparing each implementation task specifying a configuration that contains an additional configuration setting to those already included in the existing configuration is identified as already installed in the existing configuration. ### Claim 13 (depends on 12) The computer-implemented method of claim 12, further comprising including in the target package a component of those implementation tasks containing the additional configuration setting, the component including the additional configuration setting. ### Claim 14 (depends on 1) The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein during the comparing each implementation task specifying a configuration that contains a configuration setting that is different from a corresponding setting in the existing configuration is identified as already installed in the existing configuration. ### Claim 15 (depends on 14) The computer-implemented method of claim 14, further comprising including in the target package those implementation tasks containing the configuration setting that is different from the corresponding setting in the existing configuration. ### Claim 16 (depends on 15) The computer-implemented method of claim 15, further comprising adding a secondary task to each of those implementation tasks containing the configuration setting that is different from the corresponding setting in the existing configuration, each of the second tasks specifying a change to the existing configuration to resolve the difference. ### Claim 17 A system comprising: a processing device; a memory device; a comparing arrangement to identify a series of sequential implementation tasks in a reference package providing a self-contained functionality and compare, using the processing device, each of the implementation tasks in sequence to an existing configuration of an external computing system; and a customization arrangement to include in a target package each implementation task that is not already installed according to the comparing at the comparing arrangement and add a secondary task in the target package to each implementation task conflicting with the existing configuration according to the comparing at the comparing arrangement, the secondary task specifying a procedure for changing the existing configuration to resolve the conflict. ### Claim 18 (depends on 17) The system of claim 17, wherein the customization arrangement is configured with at least three types of secondary tasks from which a selection is made, the three types including: a first type of secondary task that designates a manually entered change as the specified procedure in the secondary task for changing the existing configuration to resolve the conflict, the manually entered change entered by a user through an existing standard configuration dialog enabling the user to manually change at least one setting in the existing configuration identified as conflicting with the respective implementation task, a second type of secondary task that replaces a section of the existing configuration conflicting with the respective implementation task with that specified in the respective implementation task, and a third type of secondary task specifies a conflict resolving configuration change to the existing configuration. ### Claim 19 (depends on 18) The system of claim 18, wherein the a conflict resolving configuration change to the existing configuration is obtained from an implementation object. ### Claim 20 A memory device comprising stored instructions that, when executed by a processing device, cause the processing device to: identify a series of sequential implementation tasks in a reference package providing a self-contained functionality to a computing system; compare, using a processing device, each of the implementation tasks in sequence to an existing configuration of the computing system; include in a target package each implementation task that is not already installed according to the comparing; and add a secondary task in the target package to each implementation task conflicting with the existing configuration according to the comparing, the secondary task specifying a procedure for changing the existing configuration to resolve the conflict. ### Claim 21 (depends on 20) The memory device of claim 20, wherein the stored instructions, include criteria for overriding the inclusion of at least one implementation task in the target package and changing at least one second task added in the target package.