Support & operations · Practical guide

Make publishing work without one developer's laptop

The developer's preview works, but production lacks resources created by an unrecorded local step.

Healthcare website support desk with a system checklist, telephone and orange notebook.
Know who to call and what help your support arrangement includes.

What to change

Ask the supplier to rebuild from the shared project using the documented publication process. The goal is to prove that another authorised maintainer can produce the same required output without hidden files or remembered commands. Compare the expected public resource list with the resulting package before release. If a manual editorial input is intentional, name its owner and storage location so it remains an accountable dependency rather than an accidental local secret.

A worked example

Illustrative example

Illustrative test: A replacement maintainer produces the same sample guides without copying files from a colleague's desktop. A guide collection may exist on the developer's machine because they ran a forgotten local generation step. A second authorised maintainer follows the shared instructions and finds those files absent. The supplier documents the missing input and process, then repeats the build cleanly. Your acceptance sample includes the previously missing guides. Copying the files once would repair the immediate package but leave the next maintainer facing the same unexplained gap.

Healthcare website maintenance with infrastructure, a status panel, tools and an operational checklist.
Monitor the useful journey, not just whether a server responds.
Healthcare backup and recovery illustrated by storage copies, an archive folder and a restoration route.
Test whether a backup can restore a usable service.

What this means for your practice

If a preview depends on files or commands that exist only on one person's computer, another maintainer may be unable to reproduce it. Ask your supplier to build the website from the shared project using the documented process. Compare the resulting resource list with the intended release. Any genuinely manual editorial input should have an owner and known storage location. The aim is not to eliminate every human step, but to make necessary inputs visible and repeatable. Copying missing files into one release may restore the immediate page while leaving the same weakness in place. A second authorised maintainer is a useful reviewer because their questions reveal assumptions the original developer no longer notices.

How to check the result

The release is reproducible from controlled inputs and documented steps.

A mistake to avoid

Copying the missing files once can conceal the unreproducible process.

Turn reading into a next step

Your action checklist

Work through these checks with your team or supplier. Tick the ones you have resolved and leave unknowns open.

Checks to discuss

Record what you know, what is still missing and the answer you need from your team or supplier.

Use project decisions only, without personal, patient or confidential details. Entries stay in this page and are not submitted to Kay & Co. Copy or download before leaving; this page does not save your notes.

Further reading

These sources provide background for the topic. The practice examples and checklist are illustrative planning suggestions from Kay & Co.

Related guides

Need help with this?

Tell us what is getting in the way. Kay & Co. can help you understand the options and turn the next step into something that works for your practice.

Explore support & operations services or discuss your project.

Try the free Healthcare Digital Planner to find your starting priority.