I've noticed that the documentation currently states that the benefit of using 'Run from Package' includes the following:
Can be deployed to a production app (with restart).
This is also re-enforced later in the article
The function app is then run from the package after a restart.
What is the expectation with using this feature if we are deploying this from Azure DevOps? Does every deployment then require an application restart?
I'm currently having a number of issues with using this deployment method and not actually having code updated on the function app, even though the deployment itself has stated it is completed and the zip in d:\home\data\SitePackages updated and the packagename.txt file also updated.
⚠Do not edit this section. It is required for docs.microsoft.com ➟ GitHub issue linking.
@wahyuen Thank you for posting your question. We will review this and provide an update on this.
I've been using this from Azure Devops for a while for app services CI, however in the last week the app service doesn't seem to be automatically restarted after deployment and so looks like changes have not been deployed. A manual app service restart sorts it out.
@wahyuen Yes. A restart is indeed required. The Run from Package feature is more of a runtime feature.
I believe the best way to perform deploys from Azure DevOps would be to upload the zip file to blob storage and then just update the WEBSITE_RUN_FROM_PACKAGE app setting with the URL to the package (use a private container for storage and a SAS URL here for security). An app setting update automatically restarts your app.
Do note that you could also combine this with slots as well if required.
You can read more about this feature in its official announcement as well.
@graemeenglish Could you confirm if you using the Run From Package deployment mode?

Yes we are. One possibility is that when the tasks were originally written they used a preview of the Azure App Service Deploy v4 task, I notice this has now changed to the release version of the task.
Also it seems that it does work sometimes!
@graemeenglish I wonder if this was the case...I would of sworn this was preview not that long ago. The only reason why I even came here was that we were noticing 'weirdness' in what was being deployed as oppposed to many months of happily having changes applied correctly.
@wahyuen @graemeenglish It looks like the same issue was reported and turned out to be a regression in kudu. A fix for it has been rolled out earlier today - projectkudu/kudu#2952
In case you are still seeing a problem, its best to report it in the above issue.
@wahyuen @graemeenglish I hope my previous comments clear things up.
Since there is no doc update required at the moment, we will now proceed to close this thread. If there are further questions regarding this matter, please tag me in your reply. We will gladly continue the discussion and we will reopen the issue.
Most helpful comment
@wahyuen @graemeenglish It looks like the same issue was reported and turned out to be a regression in kudu. A fix for it has been rolled out earlier today - projectkudu/kudu#2952
In case you are still seeing a problem, its best to report it in the above issue.