Build better products with our product team
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Please provide an ootb feature to create reports for Sites within AEM. Currently there are Asset Reports (Tools > Assets > Reports) available in AEM which provides some very helpful ootb reports which can be generated by the user. The same I would really like to have for Sites as editors often have the request to provide information about their websites, especially about the web pages and their status (unpublished, published). Basically the Publish Report that is available for Assets would be perfect. Use-case: As an editor I need to provide an overview to my stakeholder about my websites. They want to know how many pages they contain of and if they are published/unpublished. Similar to Publish report that is available under Tools > Assets > Reports Current/Experienced Behavior: Unfortunately no ootb AEM feature available which can be used. Improved/Expected Behavior: Provide a Publish report for Sites (under Tools > Sites) similar to the one which is available for assets under Tools > Assets > Reports) Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Carl Zeiss AG Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: We've created several smart crops that are applied to an image on upload. For a specific image these smart crops can then be changed and saved - for that image only. Use-case: If we then create an additional new smart crop to be applied to all images on upload from then on, we run Dam Update Asset or Dynamic Media:Reprocess assets to update existing images so they too have this new smart crop. Current/Experienced Behavior: However, we've found that after running either of these w/flows - any changes that were made to a specific image (as described above) are lost. Any images run thru the w/flows get the new crop - but lose any specific changes that may have been made to the existing crops. Improved/Expected Behavior: Changes to smart crops for specific images should NOT be overwritten if the image is re-processed. Or at least the option to save/overwrite should be given Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Geraint Jones/British Airways Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Enable Preview for referenced content in AEM as Cloud Service Use-case: Currently, Preview service is limited in the sense that referenced content associated with the page does not automatically get pushed to Preview and there is no option to Push to Preview for Assets, Tags, etc. Current/Experienced Behavior: Currently, Preview service is limited in the sense that referenced content associated with the page does not automatically get pushed to Preview and author has to use Add content option to include Referenced assets, tags, etc. The only option to do this in Bulk is to use a Workflow but that does not allow author to selectively distribute content. Improved/Expected Behavior: Page and all referenced content associated with the page should automatically get pushed to Preview or at least author should get an option to select the references and decide whether to push those. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as Cloud Service Latest release Customer-name/Organization name: Abbott Screenshot (if applicable): Preview option missing for Assets. Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Please enhance the information which is displayed if you hover on the publish date with exact time of publishing Use-case: As editor I maintain a lot of pages per day. And, I also publish them. The UI provides me just the date of publication, even on hover it shows me not the time when publication took place - it just provides the weekday which is pretty useless at all. For investigation reason it is a lot of effort to mark the page and check timeline in left rail to get the information about the publishing time. Current/Experienced Behavior: Currently if you hover on the publish date just the weekday is displayed in addition to date. Improved/Expected Behavior: On hover the exact time should be displayed as well like it was the case in Classic UI. This should be an easy task! Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Carl Zeiss AG Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Enhance External Link Checker page Use-case: As en editor I want know about broken external on my website which I'm responsible for and want to fix the links efficiently. Current/Experienced Behavior: Under /etc/linkchecker.html you get a list which but you can not export it to a csv. Imaging you have a lot of editors working on AEM instance each responsible for different subtrees reflecting different business groups. Now it is hard to figure out the error for specific paths in order to fix this. It is even harder if error occurs not just on a single page but in blueprint page and the connected livecopy pages (imagine 20 livecopies) - here the column get's flooded (just very long comma separated list) and hard to retrieve the information out of that. Link to documentation: https://experienceleague.adobe.com/docs/experience-manager-65/content/sites/administering/operations/external-link-checker.html?lang=en#external-link-checker Improved/Expected Behavior: Enhance the existing overview with option to export: with the exported list you could filter for paths in the referrer column and assign the list to responsible editors. Maybe a filtering directly in the UI regarding the referrer column would be even better, to see just the paths of /content which I'm responsible for not the ones of whole instance and to export this filtered view. It would be even better if I would informed about broken external links via email providing all the necessary information, meaning path to page and the external link which is not working there. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Carl Zeiss AG Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Our system has some DAM folders with more than 1000 PDFs in a single folder. We are encountering an index error when using the default Assets interface. Use-case: This should occur in an AEM system with no custom code, provided that some DAM folders have huge numbers of assets in them. The user opens Assets and traverses the system using various views. Some folders may fail to open in certain views. Current/Experienced Behavior: This appears in the log: *WARN* [10.240.32.86 [1693910873433] GET /mnt/overlay/granite/ui/content/tree.0.html/content/dam/document-library/corporate-pensions HTTP/1.1] org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.index.Cursors$TraversingCursor Traversed 1000 nodes with filter Filter(query=select [jcr:path], [jcr:score], * from [nt:base] as a where ischildnode(a, '/content/dam/document-library/corporate-pensions') order by [jcr:created] desc /* xpath: /jcr:root/content/dam/document-library/corporate-pensions/* order by @6655266:created descending */, path=/content/dam/document-library/corporate-pensions/*); consider creating an index or changing the query Subsequent investigation showed the most common places this query was coming from is:/mnt/overlay/granite/ui/content/tree.0.html (117 in 4 hours)/assets.html (97 in 4 hours) Improved/Expected Behavior: Currently the system seems to pick the ntBaseLucene query, which doesn't have the jcr:created in the index. Either that index should be changed, or the system should use the ntFolder index, which does have that. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5 SP17 Customer-name/Organization name: Not disclosed Screenshot (if applicable): N/A Code package (if applicable): N/A
s Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: in pipeline process choices, enhance a choice to Stop/Terminate after stage installation the pipeline beside current choices of "Ask every timeFail ImmediatelyContinue Immediately" Use-case: Current/Experienced Behavior: only these three options of Ask every timeFail ImmediatelyContinue Immediately Improved/Expected Behavior: add option of Stop/Terminate after stage installation Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Pipelines | Cloud Manager (adobe.com) Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: I would like you to modify it so that hyphens are not automatically converted to underscores. Use-case: When creating a folder in XF, I entered a hyphen in the title (required) and saved it, but the name (optional) was automatically converted to an underscore. Current/Experienced Behavior: When creating XF settings, hyphens entered in the title are automatically converted to underscores. Improved/Expected Behavior: When creating XF settings, Hyphens entered in the title are not automatically converted to underscores. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): 2024/3/8version Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - Requesting time off on behalf of an user in a different time zone results in 2 days booked in the systemWhy is this feature important to you - We would like to have the ability to book days off on behalf of the end users regardless of time zones, as we have user located Globally in AMER, EMEA and APAC region.
Hi there! It would be highly beneficial if there was a way to rename tasks in bulk on projects that are under current status. For example, I have 100+ projects that are current in the system, all with a task titled "Project Launch." I now want to rename this task on all active projects to include an internal code (example- "A1 Project Launch") , however Workfront doesn't have the means to do a bulk update on current projects. As a company that is fairly new to Workfront and still refining our platform and workflows, there should be a way for us to implement these types of improvements without it being a manual update on each project. Hoping this is something that can be implemented sooner rather than later.
When a proof is sent to someone to approve, their Work List indicates the date the proof was submitted on. This pulls the Proof Creation Date and not the date the stage was activated or when the proof was sent to the approver. It is very common in our company to activate a stage and sent for approval several days, weeks or even months after the Proof Creation Date. So when the document is sent to an approver, it looks like it has been sitting in their Work List for a long time when it hasn't.In addition to that, most of our proof approval requests are lumped in the "No Planned Completion Date" grouping because the deadline for the stage they are on is not pulling to the Work List. We need to be able to sort by the deadline for the approver. Or at least pull the deadline for each proof to the Work List.
Description -Create an API that allows fetches several profiles using an attribute and value as input. This way it would be possible with a single call to know which profiles have the value X in the attribute Y without having to make the call profile by profile. Why is this feature important to you -It helped to validate the information that is on Target without having to make an invocation per profile. How would you like the feature to work -Passing an attribute and a value as input, obtain all profiles that have that value and that attribute. Put the response in Json or XML due to the volume of data it may contain. Current Behaviour -Validation of attributes per profile (single request)
Description - When a Target user creates a copy of an activity, the reporting presets are not copied to the new activity. Why is this feature important to you - I have some activities with lots of metrics added to reporting presets and having to redo them when I copy the activity is time consuming. How would you like the feature to work - When a user creates a copy of a Target activity, copy the reporting presets to the new activity. Current Behaviour - When a user creates a copy of a Target activity, the reporting presets are not copied to the new activity.
Description - We notice the Resourcing Area is not manageable in the Layout Template setting which is not ideal as most of the page (UI) is manageable in Layout Template.Why is this feature important to you - Resource Page is being used heavily in our instance and we would like to ensure users are using the tools without confusion. How would you like the feature to work - We would like to have the ability to edit/modify the ‘Resourcing’ area by Layout Template. Specific requirements we have be asked to deliver are:Remove ‘resource pools’ from the left-hand menu (we manage resource pools differently to standard functionality so it is causing confusion)Add a Dashboard for all users to the left-hand menu (adding manually for thousands of users as an enterprise customer is not realistic or sustainable)Current Behaviour - Currently, there is no option to manage these in the Layout Template.
Allow for Kickstart to add more than one custom form to an object when importing data.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Support for Amazon Linux 2023(Linux kernel6.x). Use-case: Use as the OS for new servers. Since Amazon Linux2 is reaching EOL, I want to use a new standard OS. Current/Experienced Behavior: AEM 6.5 supports kernels up to 5.x. https://experienceleague.adobe.com/docs/experience-manager-65/deploying/introduction/technical-requirements.html?lang=en#server-operating-systems Improved/Expected Behavior: AEM 6.5 supports kernel 6.x including Amazon Linux 2023. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5 Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
When creating flow steps, allow user to duplicate the current flow step and either add to the current flow or add to another flow.Use case: When creating a Change Score flow step with fairly complex logic (multiple choices, tokens, etc.) that will update the Demographic Score, a user may additionally want to update the Lead Score. Current functionality requires the user to add a new Change Score item and then recreate all of the logic. A clone option would allow the user to duplicate the previous step and then change the few fields that need altered. Alternatively, allow for AND/OR logic on the Change Score step to allow multiple scores to be updated with a single choice.(Example of use case in action shown below)
Would love to bring back the Campaigns feature that allows for grouping of projects to roll up together under one campaign.
It would be great if expenses could be renamed via the terminology pop-up in a user's layout template. This would add the same functionality used for other objects for expenses. Reason being, sometimes use cases utilize this tab to mirror Excel stye reporting (can add many rows to store data) and expenses can be misleading.
Description - Scenario Planner: Import by Project TemplateWhy is this feature important to you - Allows planning for upcoming work by project template which reduces the need to input duration, resources, and budgets. A better head start on planning if the project type is known.How would you like the feature to work - Similar to importing an existing project but instead importing a project template.Current Behaviour - Only offers import of an existing project.
Description - Sometimes, projects must be canceled for one reason or another. But canceling the project for some reason does not close out the tasks under the project, leaving open tasks appearing in reports despite the fact there will never be someone working on those tasks. When canceling a project, all of its associated tasks should be canceled (which currently doesn't seem to be an option) or marked complete. Why is this feature important to you - When deactivating users, we run reports on their open projects or tasks. If they have projects that are canceled, the tasks within those projects still show as "open." The same holds true for open-task reports run for any other purpose--even if the project has been canceled, the report would show the open tasks associated with that project, making it seem work is not being done. How would you like the feature to work - If you cancel a project, its associated tasks are closed out automatically. Current Behaviour - If you cancel a project, its associated tasks remain in the status they were already in.
The dateDifference(t1; t2; unit) function in Fusion allows you to compute the number of hours/days/etc. between two timestamps (t1 and t2) provided. This behaves oddly whenever the number of hours in a day isn't exactly 24, which happens twice a year when crazy countries/localities switch between Daylight Savings Time and Standard Time.Example: On March 10, 2024, at 2am, the clocks "jump" forward to 3am. That is, there technically is no 2:00am to 2:59am on March 10. This results in March 10 having only 23 hours in the day. (The same thing happens on November 3, except we actually repeat 2:00am to 2:59am, resulting in 25 hours in the day.)This website has more information that corroborates: https://www.ge.com/digital/documentation/csense/version2023/Blocks/Daylight_Saving_Time.htm#:~:text=In%20spring%3A%20if%20a%20one,the%20day%20to%2025%20hours.If you're trying to use something like dateDifference(t1; t2; days) and expect something like 2024-03-09T00:00:00 to 2024-03-11T00:00:00 (both in America/Los_Angeles time zone) to return a value of "2", it will instead return a value of "1". This occurs because dateDifference is computing a delta of 47 hours, which is less than 48 ("2 days" as per how dateDifference is written). When dateDifference divides 47 by 48, it results in 1.979... which is then truncated to just "1".Note that this appears unique and different than any other programming language that has similar functions. You can test this using a Java online compiler such as https://www.programiz.com/java-programming/online-compiler/ and the code below: import java.time.ZoneId; import java.time.ZonedDateTime; import java.time.temporal.ChronoUnit; class HelloWorld { public static void main(String[] args) { final ZoneId timeZone = ZoneId.of("America/Los_Angeles"); final ZonedDateTime start = ZonedDateTime.of(2024, 3, 9, 0, 0, 0, 0, timeZone); final ZonedDateTime end = ZonedDateTime.of(2024, 3, 11, 0, 0, 0, 0, timeZone); System.out.println(ChronoUnit.DAYS.between(start, end)); } } Java is appropriately handling the fact that the length of a "day" is actually variable and thinking more in terms of "midnight to midnight" rather than "how many 24 hour periods exist".It is possible to workaround this using by casting every date to UTC, but this is super cumbersome, as shown by this Fusion example: The awareness required around this renders dateDifference as a dangerous function to use without advanced Computer Science knowledge. For example, the help text (shown below) is fairly simple with no warnings around this, nor are the online docs (below) hinting to the need to use UTC -- though they do only show "Z" (UTC) in the examples, which is perhaps too subtle of a thing.Ideally, dateDifference should internally cast to UTC if that's what's required to bring in line with the semantic notion of "hours" or "days" or other units. For dates that are already in UTC, this would be a "no-op" and things would work fine. For non-UTC dates, it would make things more intuitive.While a support ticket was filed on this, they redirected to submit an Idea via the forum here, saying that the current implementation of dateDifference meets the desired behavior and indicated that it would likely only get actioned if it received enough upvotes. So take this as both a warning in use of the function with its current behavior and an idea ask for the community to vote on. Hope this helps someone either way!
Description - Allow Logics (custom field setting) to apply to system default fields available on issue/request forms. Why is this feature important to you - Sometimes there is a need to Display/Skip a custom field on a custom form "if" an Issue Priority, or Project Program or Portfolio or such out of the box field is selected. How would you like the feature to work - Sometimes there is a need to Display/Skip a custom field on a custom form "if" an Issue Priority, or Project Program or Portfolio or such out of the box field is selected. Current Behaviour - It is not possible to Display/Skip a custom field on a custom form and apply logic to default system fields.
Description - our users are wanting a feature where you could “like” ,“love” or "thumbs up" comments on WF Proofs, to show support for a comment. Why is this feature important to you - The benefit of this would be a decrease in the number of “aligned” comments that leadership feels they have to make.How would you like the feature to work - within a proof comment, add a heart or thumbs up button icon next to the Reply button. This button icon would be in addition to the current icons for Attachment, Resolve and Actions.Current Behaviour - no way to indicate agreement on a proof comment except by make an additional comment.
Description - From the Awaiting my approval widget there is no easy way to view the custom form view on a task approval. The user has to make several clicks to get to the form view and it is not ideal. The old experience had an option to view the tasks custom form right from the work list item. We would like to see this capability on the new home widget as well.Why is this feature important to you - it will provide for the users a quicker way to access a task custom form for review and approval, Additionally making it easier for my users to adopt using the the new Home experience.How would you like the feature to work - in the Awaiting my approval widget, a link or button should be added on a task approval that will take you directly to the form for reviewing and editing.Current Behaviour - in the widget, the user has to make several clicks to get to the task form view and it is not ideal.
Already have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
