Build better products with our product team
Description - Can we please get the right-click functionality for opening objects in new tabs back? Why is this feature important to you - It's nice to be able to open two windows at the same time How would you like the feature to work - Right click like how we used to have it Current Behaviour - It currently doesn't work and we have to use a work around that I have to explain to all new users with a CTRL +
Description - The limitation of 2,000 returns on the external look up field prevents us from being able to use master data for client names in WorkfrontWhy is this feature important to you - Using an external look up field to allow users to choose from a golden record for our client names would provide more robust reports in Workfront.How would you like the feature to work - We would like Adobe to increase this threshold as 2,000 returns is very limiting. A query search allowing more options would support our use of golden records for robust filtering.Current Behaviour - the look up field returns the first 2,000 lines only and ignores anything after that. Our master data platform can return up over 16,000 records in 1.8 seconds but they cannot be accessed beyond the first 2,000.
Description - Be able to set a character limit in single line text field or paragraph text field. Why is this feature important to you - We have certain assets that we can only have a certain number of characters when using the single line text field or paragraph text field option in the form. To be able to set the limit would be helpful. We currently use the instructions to let them know not to go over, but it's not always followed. How would you like the feature to work - When the system admin is creating the form, they would be able to change the character limit if they need to for single line text field or paragraph text field. Otherwise it would default to the standard if no limit is needed. Current Behaviour - There is no character limit on custom forms and having users follow the instructions is not always working.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Currently we are not able to configure external github repositories to a Configuration deployment pipelines. When we add non-adobe github repo, it throws error `An external repository is not yet supported for this type of pipeline.` Use-case: We were migrating from internal TFS repo to enterprise github repository. We to point other pipelines: Code Quality, FullStack, Front End pipelines to external Git. Just the configuration deployment pipeline alone is blocked. Sounds like temporary limitation, it is intentionally blocked. Current/Experienced Behavior: When changing repository to external non-adobe, it is throwing error Improved/Expected Behavior: Configuration pipeline should allow external non-adobe github repositories Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): 2025.3.20133.20250325T063357Z Customer-name/Organization name: SouthernGlazers Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
It's can be so tedious to do a full clean up in Marketo when assets and fields are "used by." Marketo should introduce a more intelligent, guided deletion workflow for assets (like emails, forms, smart lists) and custom fields, even when they’re currently in use. The goal is to streamline the process and reduce the manual effort and risk associated with cleanup. Why This Matters:Fields and assets are often entangled across multiple campaigns, forms, and smart lists, making deletion tedious and risky.The current "Used By" view is limited and doesn’t always show full dependency chains, especially with nested assets or tokens.Custom fields are hard to deprecate fully. Even after clearing them from forms or flows, they remain blocked due to invisible references.Proposed Features:A “Smart Delete” tool that:Maps all dependencies (even nested ones) across the entire workspace.Offers options to replace or deactivate references in bulk.Includes a “safe delete preview” to assess the impact before confirming.Supports versioning or rollback in case something breaks.For fields: warns if the field is used in forms, filters, flows, or reports, and helps remove those references intelligently.
In the new Email Insights tool, my biggest complaint is with the Custom Dimensions and the fact that you can't change/delete them once they are created. I can see this being a major frustration for Marketo users, especially if certain use-cases change for what you want to report on. Another issue with having the restricted limits on the Custom Dimensions is not being able to test and adjust. The restrictions mean that users need to be more strategic about what Custom Dimensions will be used. I think there should be a way for Custom Dimensions to be deleted or changed.Do you agree?
Hi all,Yesterday I found myself working on a report and I needed to get the bounce rate for a specific country. I already setup the calculated metric to get bounce rate, but then I realized that no option to use calculated metrics on reports from the data warehouse.I think there´s no way to do this, so that´s my proposal to be included on the platform.
Can we add an option in the admin section where we can define the default fields of a forms, when a new form is created within that particular instance. Ex: Currently whenever we create a new form, we always get First Name, Last Name and Email. There should be an option in admin section where we can define some custom fields like UTM etc. as a default field available in the form whenever anyone creates a new form.
Description - At present my understanding is that we are only able to see collisions information in Target by opening each activity, this is very time consumingWhy is this feature important to you - We have many experiments running at the same time often using the same website pages.How would you like the feature to work - A collisions dashboard that would show all of the activities running on a specific page.Current Behaviour - Currently I can only see this information by seperately opening each activity.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Introduce a built-in visual debugging tool in AEM Author to detect and highlight failed ClientLibs loading (eg. 404s, category mismatches). Use-case: AEM pages often break in layout or functionality due to missing or incorrectly loaded ClientLibs, especially during template development or after dispatcher/CDN deployments. Authors and content editors face difficulties identifying these issues quickly without browser dev tools expertise. Current/Experienced Behavior: Missing ClientLibs result in broken layouts, JS errors, or missing styles/scripts - but no warnings are visible to non-technical users on the page itself. Only browser dev tools or logs reveal these issues, making root cause analysis slow. Improved/Expected Behavior: AEM should highlight missing ClientLibs visually on the page, or provide a debugging overlay or console warning for authors. This should include category mismatch detection, permission issues, and HTTP error codes for assets. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as a Cloud Service; observed in multiple environments with Dispatcher/CDN caching layers. Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Provide a restore functionality for Assets Console Use-case: As an editor, if I have accidentally deleted one asset from the Classic Assets Console (/aem/assets.html) in AEMaaCS or even a folder with hundreds of assets, I would like to have an easy way to restore the deleted item(s). Current/Experienced Behavior: Currently, I have no chance to restore them. The only option is to do a "Restore content" via Cloud Manager, done by the admins which would restore the whole instance and with that changes, which have been done in the meantime, will be gone.I do not understand why a enterprise CMS does not offer such a basic functionality like a trash folder for asset! Improved/Expected Behavior: Provide a trash folder for the Asset Console were deleted items first end up after deletion. From there they could be restored. Of course some purge task should clean up here after a certain time which should be configurable.The new Assets UI has a trash functionality - but this works only for item which have been deleted using the same 😞 See screenshot 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):
We have added some specific description text in our program(Under program name) and now we want to findout how many program has the same description. However, there is no direct filter or report to search these programs. Can this be added in the list of search options in the upcoming releases as many other Adobe clients as also using Description field and this will be very helpful for all of them.
Marketoにて日本語メールを配信しておりますが、Gmailアカウントで受信した際に「日本語に翻訳」という自動翻訳機能が表示される事象が発生しています。ユーザー側のGmail設定にも依存することは承知しておりますが、「日本語に翻訳」をクリックするとおそらく「日本語→英語→日本語」といった誤った翻訳処理が行われ、結果として文面が不自然になりユーザーに文章がおかしいと思われる可能性が高いです。このような翻訳機能の誤作動を防ぐため、Gmail上で「日本語に翻訳」が表示されないようにする設定があればと思います。
Description - You can share items in bulk, but you can't unshare in bulk. Tier 1 support said I can do this with Fusion, but I don't have Fusion. This strikes me as something that you shouldn't have to pay an additional fee to address. Why is this feature important to you - It's tedious to have to adjust share permissions one object at a time. In my case, I was hoping to unshare projects in bulk to soft archive them and therefore reduce load time for my users. We have many years of work that we want to keep but hide from most users without losing the historical data. How would you like the feature to work - Detect common sharedness across bulk selection so that we can remove them from the share permissions in bulk. Bonus points if you can additionally choose to unshare down the inheritance chain (for example, at the portfolio level all the way down to tasks, issues, and documents). Current Behaviour - You can select multiple projects that you know have at least one common user, job role, team, group, or company, but the common shared item doesn't appear in the dialogue to remove from the share permissions. Instead the share permissions are blank. Additionally, you can remove an item from the sharing and, despite the dialogue that gives you the option to unshare across all child objects, it doesn't remove those inherited permissions.
I have two customized notifications. One to notify when an issue is completed and one for when a task is assigned. In order for the customization to work, the flag for the object had to be set to true. I have a report that I run to set the flag. Is there a way of defaulting the flag to true?
When sending a recurring email that someone could qualify more than once - if you look at email stats it will only show the first send to a Lead if they get the same email more than once within the same Program.So if you're looking at "How many Leads got X email last month?" - it's going to only show the Leads that receive that email the first time.I know that you can pull down the Activity through the API to capture all sends to the same Lead - but it would be nice to have the ability to see that in the UI so that if requested an accurate total can be pulled.
I'm working on changes to our RCM model and doing testing in our sandbox. Currently its required to have to rebuild the model in PROD once testing in the sandbox is approved which means i need to revalidate everything again in production to make sure I did not make any errors when re-creating it. Would love to be able to import the RCM model from a sandbox or other instance of Marketo.
Description: to have the ability to collapse/uncollapse items in PrioritiesWhy is this feature important to you: Many of us will have several groupings under priorities, specially if we group by project. It will be useful to have the ability to collapse the results.How would you like the feature to work: to have a carrot icon in the top, similar to other groupings in WF, to have the ability to collapse/uncollapse all results at once.Current Behaviour: we can't collapse/uncollapse all results at once.
It seems like it would be enormously helpful for requestor/reviewers to see on the new Home screen a widget containing tasks that were converted from requests they raised. You can do this in custom reports or project filters (using "converted issue originator = me") but it does not work in the Home task widget. The task widget only shows tasks that are assigned to the logged-in user, which only benefits Work license holders and not the vast majority of users with requestor/reviewer licenses. I raised a support ticket on this; the rep was very helpful but confirmed the above and suggested I raise this as an idea.
Description These days, the AEP sources data prep UI for calculated fields is lacking basic functions to (easily) transform incoming data structures like arrays through a computed field into a target structure of any kind which makes it really cumbersome to work with. Also, asterisk syntax is only supported in standard mapping fields. Why is this feature important to you Well, the source data often does not match the XDM schema data and has to be brought into the right format. The provided functions are insufficient. The destinations data prep, however, seems to contain more functions to transform hierarchies. How would you like the feature to work Let's start with something trivial like looping over arrays to transform their data. Destinations Data Prep: transformArray([5, 6, 7], x -> x + 1) Sources Data Prep: ??? Current Behaviour - It seems impossible or at least extremely cumbersome to do even minimal transformations on any array or object data on the Source side. This in turn puts potentially a lot of extra work on the devs to provide the right data input format, potentially increasing the size of the to be imported data significantly if the target structure has to be pre-built. This comes with a lot of implications like necessary adjustments on the data providing side, should anything ever change in the schema.
Description -Add the ability for Workfront Users to create a Custom Fiscal Year "wildcard" filter. Why is this feature important to you - Our Fiscal Year is very different from Calendar Year. Leadership doesn't find value in Calendar Year, they want Fiscal Year.How would you like the feature to work - Be able to have a between "ANY" Year with a specific Month/DateCurrent Behaviour -There is a Calendar Year, but not Fiscal Year.
Suggested improvements:- Fix spacing of left column- Make the additional time slots optional, current feature makes the calendar too clunky/ tall - Have the order of the tasks match the order of the column on the left, don't move completed tasks to the top- Make task information visible by hovering over the task - Add capability to hide Saturdays and Sundays
Description - We've had feedback from a couple teams who manage our automation for different business units. They heavily use calendars to see what emails are going out in a week or month. With a larger volume of email tasks, the new view truncates what they can see on any given day and forces them to click "see more" and scroll through a tiny pop-up to see all their tasks. The weekly view is a little better, but they also need to see what tasks they have scheduled week over week. Why is this feature important to you - Our automation teams have strict regulations on how many emails can be sent to an audience within a period of time. They use calendars to visualize this metric on their weekly calls. How would you like the feature to work - We'd love to see the day squares to expand to allow for all items to show at a glance. Similar to the previous version of the calendar. Current Behavior - The new view truncates what our teams can see on any given day and forces them to click "see more" and scroll through a tiny pop-up to see all their tasks.
There's been previous conversations about how "before" date filters include blank values, and whether or not that is ideal behavior. I think the best solution to this would actually be to add another constraint to date/datetime fields called "include blanks: true/false." That way you could make determinations definitively whether blank dates should be included in each filter.
Description -Why is this feature important to you - We have fusion scenarios set up for specific fields in custom forms. When folks can enter in any information within a single-select drop-down it causes fusion errors, time in me deciphering what the heck was added, and allows to much power to be given to someone in a non-admin role. How would you like the feature to work - Follow the thought process for "mandatory fields" and add a checkbox that says "should this field be locked."Current Behaviour -
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.
