I wish to run a DXA 2.2 web application from the same Tridion system as sites running DXA 2.0. The goal is therefore to have the DXA 2.2 templates available in a separate folder from the DXA 2.0 templates. The normal way to install DXA templates is to use the cms-import.ps1 or cms-upgrade.ps1 scripts. These scripts also do various other things, and to keep the impact low, I am considering simply uploading the assembly TBB to its own folder using the template uploader. Then getting the right templates to be used would simply be a question of fixing up the references to the C# fragments.

At first sight this is an attractive approach, but looking in more detail at what the scripts do, I'm concerned I might miss some other important differences between DXA 2.0 and DXA 2.2. Are any of the items other than the templates needed to run DXA 2.2 successfully?

If I were to do this, would I be able to use future versions of the import/upgrade scripts?

Is there a possible way to install the DXA 2.2 templating with the scripts in a way that it doesn't interfere with the templating for the existing DXA 2.0 sites? The only parameter I see that might allow this is $rootFolder, but that doesn't look really suitable. I've also considered adding a publication and arranging the blueprint so that the DXA 2.2 templates are closer to my web publications than the DXA 2.0 templates. Again, it sounds good, but I suspect I'd have problems with schemas.

Update: based on some further discussions, it seems adding an extra publication is probably the only way to use the scripts while keeping the versions of the templates separate, as the locations relative to $rootFolder are fixed. Given that the scripts also move some items, which may well lead to blueprinting conflicts, might it be better to do the import with mappings? In this case, i.e. without the scripts, what other pitfalls would we have to look out for?

In short, what I need is framework-only with a side-by-side option, so I suspect there'll be some manual steps. What's the best way to tackle this?

See also DXA 2.0 upgrade from 1.8 - what is bare minimum on CM?

1 Answer 1


The difference between DXA 2.2 and 2.0 on CM side is mainly in the TBBs and associated parameter schemas (and the resolver).

So, your idea to just upload the DXA 2.2 TBBs would get you quite far. But, in general, DXA CM-side is more than only the TBBs, of course. To be on the safe side, it’s best to import/upgrade all items from the framework-only package.

Indeed, I would advise to create a separate “master” Publication in your BluePrint and do a framework-only import in that Publication.

  • In practice, we ended up with a master-only import, as the target system was 8.6 and the framework-only import is only available from 9. Commented Jul 9, 2020 at 8:35

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.