Build better products with our product team
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Cross Program Content Copy in AEM as a Cloud Service Use-case: We are looking to copy content between two environments across different programs, such as from Environment A in Program A to Environment B in Program B. Currently, the content copy tool only supports content transfer within the same program ID, which limits this capability. Current/Experienced Behavior: The AEM Content Copy Tool is designed for content movement within the same Cloud Manager program. Transferring content across different programs is not supported.- Adobe does not provide an out-of-the-box solution for cross-program content migration to maintain content integrity and security. Improved/Expected Behavior: We are looking to copy content between two environments across different programs, such as from Environment A in Program A to Environment B in Program B. Currently, the content copy tool only supports content transfer within the same program ID, which limits this capability. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as a Cloud Service - 2024.10 Customer-name/Organization name: Air India Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
As a marketing team who has been using Adobe Sites, Assets, and Guides for several years prior to adopting Workfront we have developed a complex and highly used marketing taxonomy using AEM Tags in the Adobe Experience Manager platform. Instead of rebuilding or migrating our metadata taxonomy framework into another system it would be beneficial from a time and consistency perspective to use that same marketing taxonomy tag structure in Workfront, so that we can manage the marketing taxonomy in one location for multiple Adobe technologies.
Having the descriptive text show in black makes it looks just like the text that exists elsewhere on the form. Often this text is used for instructions and having it the same color as form field answers is confusing and hard to read. A simple option would work here as well. Either black or gray as a selection.
Description - It would be a good idea to publish documentation about the plan mode feature on the project landing page. Why is this feature important to you - Project Managers, when shown this feature, really like what it can do, and they ask for documentation on how it works but there is none. How would you like the feature to work - I would like that there is documentation on this feature available, including - that it exists, how to access it, and an explanation of how it works. Current Behaviour - There is no documentation and support suggested it be raised as an 'idea'
機能改善要求（RFE）概要： There is a Content Tree on the left side of the CF Console. When there are many folders here, I would like to have only the folders that contain Content Fragments displayed by default so that I can access folders that contain Content Fragments quickly. There are many folders with similar names, and since only part of the names are displayed, it is difficult to distinguish which folders contain Content Fragments.Providing a checkbox to toggle the visibility of folders that do not contain Content Fragments could be a good option. @arunpatidar ユースケース： Filtering Content Fragments 現在／体験した動作： I often get lost trying to navigate to the correct path. 改善／期待される動作： Faster path selection reduces unnecessary actions. 環境の詳細（AEM バージョン／サービスパック、もしあればその他の詳細）： AEM As a Cloud Service 顧客名／組織名 スクリーンショット（ある場合） コードパッケージ（ある場合）
Allow system admins and project owners to MOVE entire comment/update threads to a different task, project, request or program.Issue: Many users plop comments in the wrong location which causes much confusion among team members. Then it is exacerbated by people replying to the comments.Yes, we can copy the thread or copy the text, but this is still not enough because people still go to the old/wrong location.
Description -We have users who do not need to log time based on their job level. For those users, we didn't apply a timesheet profile. Now we have some users were who logging time but due to recent job role changes are now not required to log time. I went to change their timesheet profile to remove it and with the new UI updates, it does not allow me to do so. It only always you to choose another timesheet profile. How would you like the feature to work - I would like the ability to completely remove or clear a timesheet profile from a user’s profile in the UI. Ideally, there should be an option to select “none” or leave the field blank, so that no timesheet is generated for those users who do not need to log time. Current Behaviour -Currently, the new UI does not allow clearing or removing a timesheet profile from a user’s profile. Instead, it requires assigning a different profile, with no option to set it to “none.” Support has confirmed this is a known limitation affecting multiple customers. They provided a workaround below, but it is more time-consuming and less efficient. Allowing administrators to remove timesheet profiles directly in the UI would simplify the process and improve usability. From Support: Best workaround here would be to create a “No Timesheet Required” profile to act as a replacement for these users. You could do this by creating a dummy timesheet profile (e.g., “No Timesheet Required”) with settings that do not generate timesheets or have no approvers/hours types. Then assign this profile to users who should not log time. You will then want to update your “no logged time” reports to exclude users assigned to this profile.
Description - When requests are assigned to a team the requests drop off after a two week planned completion date.Why is this feature important to you - Assigned teams may have a backlog of requests and once the two week timeline they lose sight of the requests.How would you like the feature to work - Create a filter to have team requests display with certain criteria and have the planned completion date be adjustable.Current Behaviour - Team requests disappear after two weeks from planned completion date of request.
Description - when marking your own PTO in Workfront, at that point to also offer the opportunity to create an out of office notification if you are tagged, messaged or sent requests etc within Workfront - a notification to send to the originator that you are not available to process their ask or make comments etc.Why is this feature important to you - we encourage all project related comms to be in the relevant projects. If you are not aware of people not being in the office/at work then assumption is that they are there to receive the message.How would you like the feature to work - as an email out of office notification.Current Behaviour - if you have not heard from someone after a while, need to investigate if they are working by checking email out of office notifications.
Description - Have the date range comparisons update to align with selected dates for current time period regardless of date granularity and without need to go into the settings and adjustment comparison time periods Why is this feature important to you - allows for fewer and more flexible reports to be built for the teamHow would you like the feature to work - the custom time period is based on both the first and last date in the selection and updates automatically as the date range is updatedCurrent Behaviour - locked to the start date and requires going into the time range settings and adjusting the rolling time periods (much too complex for basic business user)
Description - Currently, when an issue is converted to a project, for any screen captures that are added to updates in the issue, only the image data transfers to the created project, and not the image itself. Why is this feature important to you - Users must manually add the image to the project after conversion, which is tedious and can easily be forgotten by the user during conversion. How would you like the feature to work - the images should transfer to the converted project, within the same update, along with the update data and image data. Current Behaviour - Image is not transferred as part of the project conversion process (refer to Adobe Support Ticket #E-001837945)
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Ability to Search pipeline in AEM Cloud Manger Use-case: With growing number of pipelines for Front end with several environments it hard to find and run the pipeline form cloud manger Current/Experienced Behavior: No Search functionality available Improved/Expected Behavior: Search functionality to search pipelines in Cloud manger Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Cloud Manger Pipeline screen Customer-name/Organization name: Unilever Account Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description:We would like to see update on Trade Desk connector to connect directly on a partner level rather then on advertiser level. It would be great to have both. Why is this feature important for us: We work with several countries and therefore we have a lot of advertisers. As we can not connect on a partner level - it means we have to manually configer destinaiton with mayn different adverticer rather then just configur it once with the partner. How would you like the feature to work:The same as Trade desk connectro works now, but would have possibility to chose between advertiser or partner. Current Behaviour:Only Trade Desk Adverticer ID connections are possible.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Content Hub Use-case: Granular Permissions: Introduce granular permissions control in content hub to allow more precise access management at the user, group and asset level Public Sharing Enhancements: Enable public sharing of collections in Content Hub to simplify external access and collaboration through enhanced public sharing link sharing functionality Current/Experienced Behavior: No public sharing for collections available Improved/Expected Behavior: Enabling sharing of collections Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5 Customer-name/Organization name: Barclays Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - Allow New Microsoft Teams to Integrate with WorkfrontWhy is this feature important to you - Classic Microsoft Teams is being retired on the 30th June 2025 and we have uses who spend a lot of time in teams and find the functionality very useful.How would you like the feature to work - Transfer the functionality of Classic Teams onto New Teams which will allows you to interact with notifications / approvals from WF and add new requests into WF.Current Behaviour - It connects but no interactions to or from WF are possible. WF support confirm there is no current plan to get this working.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: lease enable support for modern package managers in the Frontend Deployment Pipeline. Currently the pipeline only supports NPM, which although widely adopted is also generally known as the slowest solution for package management within the nodejs ecosystem. Consider support for yarn or pnpm, both of which outperform NPM from a CI/CD perspective. Use-case: We currently use Yarn on Managed Services to deploy full stack code. However, when migrating to Cloud Services and wanting to take advantage of the Front End (FED) pipeline, NPM is assumed and only the version can be altered via pipeline variables. We use Yarn as it has additional features and builds/deploys faster than NPM. Similarly, pnmp and Yarn PnP deploy about twice as fast as npm in our benchmark tests. Current/Experienced Behavior: Customers must use NPM and package-lock.json as the deployment package manager Improved/Expected Behavior: Customers can customize the FED deployment pipline to usee the package manager of their choice. This could be either an explicit selection, a pipeline variable, or the pipeline could lockfile detection (npm uses package-lock.json, yarn uses yarn.lock, pnpm uses pnpm-lock.yaml) Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): This request is for AEM Cloud Service, current version. Customer-name/Organization name: Toyota Motors North America (TMNA) Screenshot (if applicable) Code package (if applicable):
Description - While creating a new audience by combining existing audiences, we can only add upto 20 segments and add upto 2 containers one with in another.Why is this feature important to you - In some cases we want to add more than 20 segments and create complex audiences making use of profile scripts and add 3 or more containersHow would you like the feature to work - Just as the regular segment creation, with updated max limits.
機能改善要求（RFE）概要： I would like ease the technical requirements for AEM 6.5 LTS to be support "Java 11" and "Linux kernel 4" be added. ユースケース： I am considering AEM 6.5 LTS(On Premise). 現在／体験した動作： AEM 6.5 LTS support Java17 and Linux kernel 5. If AEM6.5LTS were to be applied at this time, the customer environment would require an update to the Linux OS and Java version.As there are currently no customer environments that have Java 17 and Linux kernel 5 installed,it is expected that application and approval will take time. In the worst case scenario, business could be lost when support for the AEM6.5 ends. 改善／期待される動作： Because, we would like to avoid the worst case scenario by supporting Java11 Linux kernel4 in AEM6.5 LTS, just like AEM6.5. 環境の詳細（AEM バージョン／サービスパック、もしあればその他の詳細）： AEM 6.5 SP19 and AEM 6.5 LTS 顧客名／組織名 スクリーンショット（ある場合） コードパッケージ（ある場合）
Description - Bulk upload of IP addresses to block via the datastreamWhy is this feature important to you - We have more than 10K IP addresses we need to add to our bot rules via the APE data stream, today we are having to manually add these IPs. We would like to avoid this data in our connections as it eats into our CJA rows- data budgetHow would you like the feature to work - Allow a bulk upload option via a csv fileCurrent Behaviour - Today the tool allows only one IP address/ range upload condition at a time.
The new Priorities view has really caught on with our team. The GUI is attractive and the recent release brings a lot of functionality that helps the team have a singular place to go in order to manage work assigned to them. But it could be perfect! Please add the same "edit allocations" functionality as is available in the Workload Balancer (within the Resource Management section) that allows a user to specify planned hours for a task on a day-to-day, week-to-week, or month-to-month basis. Currently, the Priorities view only allows a user to change the total planned hours of a task over the entire duration of the task.The ability for a working team member to specify the exact amount of hours they will spend on the remainder of a task gives managers a more specific view from week to week. We do not have access restrictions of the Workload Balancer on our team and have found it very useful to use during our meetings when discussing what will be worked on during a given week and each member has the autonomy to update the planned hours for all tasks that are either in progress or about to start. This granularity that the Workload Balancer provides would make the Priorities view the ONLY view that a team would need in order to make quick, simple changes without having to jump to a different part of Workfront. Perhaps the Log Time pop-up (image attached) could be used to enter in allocations? Thanks!
Description - Why is this feature important to you - We have a field that are frequently referenced, and highly relevant to a large audience of users. Presently, in order to get a glance at that information, users need to drill in to a custom form and scroll to the relevant field.How would you like the feature to work - In addition to the 5 standard fields presently available at the top of the layout template, there would be a couple of custom field slots.Current Behaviour - There are only slots for 5 standard fields.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: As an Author,I want to have an image search option in Page propertiesSo that I can author pages with more ease Use-case: Current/Experienced Behavior: PFA for more details Improved/Expected Behavior: Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Cloud Manager AEM Release: 2024.11.18751.20241128T090041Z Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable): @manikandan.murugan@ey.com @aberdane@adobe.com
Hi, I think it would be great if we have a multi-select option to select more than one tag value for a specific tag in the system. ex: Lets say i have a tag named Vertical and I would like to select more than one picklist value during the program creation step. Currently, we either have to select one or come up with a specific tag value that could accommodate this specific need as we are unable to select more than one value from the picklist. Thanks, vineela.
Description - The Print Summary PDF download within Workfront’s Proofing tool creates a flat image of the proof with any comments and markups, and is used if the marked up proof needs to be circulated outside of the proofing tool itself. The reason the originally uploaded pdf with any markups made in the proofing tool needs to be extracted from Workfront, rather than viewed in the tool itself by the agencies making amends as a result of these mark ups, is the agencies often use other Adobe products and comparison tools which contain scripted (coded) elements to compare the original pdf to the marked up pdf, and amend original files where possible in a more automated way. Given Workfront is an Adobe product, it would be preferable to have a high quality Adobe PDF output which is compatible with other Adobe products to ensure consistency and ease of use. The rasterising of the marked up proof and addition of wide margins / summary page changes the structure of the file so much from the original that it makes it impossible to be run through scripting tools when comparing to the original document / pdf. Why is this feature important to you - Having integrated Workfront into the organisation, we now have major issues in our in-house agency being able to use the system fully in the way we intended them to, i.e. collaborating with comms teams via the system, being able to download a marked up PDF once this has gone through the system, and then re-upload the amended document. We’d also like the agency to be able to use their comparison tools and quality check tools in order to negate risk in sending customer communications out incorrectly, and keep their working processes as automated as possible. How would you like the feature to work - If a pdf is uploaded as a document to Workfront, then made into a proof, then circulated to reviewers & approvers for comment, we would like these comments to be applied to the original pdf as if they had been made by the reviewer in Adobe Acrobat or Reader, and make these comments available on the (original) downloaded pdf, without changing the way the original file looks or inflating the filesize (the print summary PDF screenshot / rasterization process can inflate the filesize by upwards of 20x). Ultimately we need multiple reviewers to be able to comment / collaborate / review one file in a similar way to how several users can on a shared PDF in document cloud, but from within the WF application and also allowing them the ability to record an approval decision. Current Behaviour - As it stands, the proofing tool produces a flat image file containing mark ups. Our agencies cannot work with this in terms of using it in their comparison tool and quality checking tools. The PDF print summary therefore cannot be used due to it not being the original Adobe PDF. As such, users now have to use a workaround process in which they go offline and mark up the original PDF to send to the agency, even though they use the proofing tool for reviewer comment and approval.
Description - When a project owner is reviewing a project and find a task marked as Complete Pending Approval and review to find the task needs to have more work done on it, but they are not one of the approvers, when they change the status of the task to either In Progress or New, the user assigned to the task gets no notification and the task does not show on their My Work. This is because the assigned user still has the checkmark of complete on the task. This makes the project owner take additional steps of having to tag the assigned person to let them know they have to click the "not done yet" or unassign the person and reassign them to the task. Why is this feature important to you - This causes confusion for the project owner and if they forget to tag the assigned user or do the unassign reassign steps the task will be delayed. How would you like the feature to work - When the status of a task is changed from Complete or Complete Pending Approval to either New or In Progress the "done" indication for the assigned user should be removed and the task should appear on their My Work. Current Behavior - When a user marks a task as "work on it" then completes the task, it marks them as "done" and adds a Checkmark next to their icon that shows they are assigned to the task. If the task is then moved back to in progress by someone else, the checkmark remains and since the user completed what they needed to do.
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.
