Build better products with our product team
It would be great to have an option (setting) to enable a "Pop-up text box" to allow users to provide information on why the Status has changed. So that when the Approval gets the required information when approving the project. Example: If a project is set to "Cancelled" and approval is configured, the project manager would be prompted to fill in the necessary details explaining the reason for the cancellation. This would equip the approver with the essential information needed to make informed decisions.
Description - Introduction of "Expiry Date" for each API key on the Customer Info page.Why is this feature important to you - Being able to see when an API key is due to expire can allow for forward planning of recycling API keys.How would you like the feature to work - An additional column in the API Key Settings on Customer Info page which displays the API keys expiry date.Current Behaviour - The expiry date is not listed.
Description - I have been manually monitoring the amount of rows ingested into CJA and using rolling windows to keep the consumption within licensed range. Why is this feature important to you - to prevent the company from being overcharged for overusage. In addition, this forces us to keep only the most relevant data in CJA. How would you like the feature to work - in the current License Usage section, just update the number on a daily basis. Current Behaviour - CJA license usage is updated on a monthly basis.
Description - We have custom Rich Text fields that we take project notes in. We use bullets, bolding, underlining, etc to separate ideas and make the notes more quickly understandable. When I export the report to PDF or to excel the formatting disappears. It would be very helpful if we could keep the formatting in the exported report.
Description - Each file in Workfront when a proof is created has the SOC status views. We think adding A for Approved would be a good at-a-glance look to confirm a proof has been approved rather than pull over the sidebar and scroll down to see if a proof is approved.Why is this feature important to you - It would provide less clicks to know if a number of files are approved rather than clicking into each one and pulling the sidebar to confirm each are approved when there could be over 5 files.How would you like the feature to work - We would like to have the SOC to look like SOCA where A = Approved.Current Behaviour - Currently, there is no way of knowing a list of files are all approved without clicking into each one.
Description -After being migrated to the IMS Admin users can no longer delete user accounts from their system. The drop down menu option is still there but we can not make use of it. Give us back that capability. Why is this feature important to you - There have been occasions where someone entered an incorrect account, for whatever reason. The account is now sitting in our user list as deactivated but still there. It would be nice to be able to clean up the user list and delete unnecessary accounts. How would you like the feature to work - Just as it always has. The menu options are there, just turn them back on for us. Current Behaviour - I select the Delete option and I get an errror saying delete has been turned off and this is being managed by the IMS. But there is no way in IMS to delete either, just remove user permissions.
Description:Currently, users can add personal To-Do tasks either via the Home widget or by creating tasks directly within their personal To-Do List project. However, these tasks do not reflect planned hours by default and therefore are not factored into Workload Balancer capacity calculations, even though they may take up meaningful portions of an individual's day. This creates a disconnect between actual user availability and what project/resource managers see when planning workloads. For example, a user may be spending several hours on personal To-Do items (e.g., training, internal documentation, self-assigned initiatives), but still appear 100% available for project work in the Workload Balancer view. Suggested Enhancement:Allow users to optionally assign planned hours and durations when creating personal To-Do tasks—ideally directly from the Home widget interface or through a simplified entry form. This would allow the system to:Accurately reflect that time as allocated in the Workload Balancer.Provide project/resource managers with a more realistic view of team member availability.Reduce the need for manual workarounds such as navigating to the Personal Tasks project or embedding planned hours into task names.Optional Features for Consideration:Enable a toggle when creating a To-Do item to "Include in workload capacity."Allow admins to define whether these tasks can be visible to others (e.g., team leads or managers) or remain private.Improve visibility of these To-Dos in reports and dashboards alongside regular task assignments.Business Value:This improvement would help organizations more accurately manage resources and plan projects by ensuring that all time commitments, including self-managed tasks, are visible during capacity planning. It would also reduce overhead from workarounds, improve forecasting accuracy, and support better workload distribution across teams.
Description - Reviewers on proof should be able to see the deadline of the stage they're part of on multi-staged proofs Why is this feature important to you - many clients have asked for this How would you like the feature to work - on users Home Work List it would have the stage deadline shown for proofs pending their approval. Also on users My Updates area, proofs pending approval should display their stage's proof deadline Current Behaviour - proof deadlines are not shown or displayed often and if they are, it only displays the furthest out stage proof deadline.
We're having huge challenges with our users not tagging people in their comments in updates. When you go to post an update in a project, could it automatically tag everyone with access to the project and give you the ability to opt people out? This would be instead of putting it on the user to remember to tag the specific people on the project they need to notify. That would alleviate users posting updates with no tagging and no one getting notified of the update.
Description - Would love to have a tag to use to indicate everyone on a Project. Such as "@Everyone" or "@All"Why is this feature important to you - Because the People tab is limited in formatting and missing all the bells and whistles of the Updates tab.How would you like the feature to work - When putting a note into a Project, or a Task, or an Issue related to a project, I'd like to be able to put an "@All" and it tags everyone.Current Behaviour - You have to go to the people tab to do that and you can't format the text.
Description - Currently, when you edit an approver in an approval process, it resets all issues back to the first stage. Why is this feature important to you - One of our projects has over 100 issues at a time. When we have to edit a single approver in the chain, it means we have to have manually reset every issue back to where it was (and hopefully whoever edited the process saved an excel history of where everything was!) How would you like the feature to work - When editing an approval process, issues should be updated with the correct approver without resetting everything.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: The proposed feature aims to enable businesses to generate customizable, template-based reports by leveraging metadata criteria for assets stored in Adobe Experience Manager (AEM). These reports can be scheduled for automated generation and distributed to various platforms or teams. Use-case: Businesses often need reports filtered based on specific metadata values (e.g., region, asset type, product category). These reports are essential for: Supporting marketing campaigns by identifying suitable content. Generating insights for compliance or governance reviews. However, manually filtering and compiling this data is time-intensive and prone to errors. Automating this process would save time and improve data accuracy. Current/Experienced Behavior: We need to manually filter the content after generating reports for all assets. Improved/Expected Behavior: Report Templates: Admins can create and save report templates with predefined metadata filters. Automated Scheduling: Reports can be scheduled (e.g., daily, weekly, monthly) to run and generate outputs in standard formats like CSV, Excel, or PDF. Customizable Distribution: Generated reports can be automatically emailed or pushed to other integrated platforms (e.g., Slack, Teams, or SharePoint). Granular Access Control: Access to report creation and data is managed via AEM’s existing permissions model. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5 Customer-name/Organization name: Mondelez Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description: Enable sharing of request drafts, which is currently not possible in Workfront.Importance: Requestors save drafts to gather missing information or discuss with managers. Sharing drafts allows for manager input before submission.Benefits:• Manager review and feedback.• Team collaboration.• Comprehensive review by all parties.Desired Functionality: Add a "Share draft" icon to share drafts with internal team members.Current Behavior: Workfront allows sharing request queue links for direct submissions, but drafts remain private until submitted.
For better usability, we should have the ability to select multiple constraints within a filter simultaneously.For example, I am setting up a smart list with multiple account-level requirements, and I need to add upward of three constraints to each filter individually. Instead of having to click into filter and add constraints one at a time, it would be much more efficient to select all the necessary constraints at once.
Description - The Fusion UI automatically zooms out on paste, or starting the scenario (Run once). When adding a note, it scrolls to the left until the first module is in view. Why is this feature important to you - The automatical scrolling/zooming is super annoying when working in a large scenario. It serves no purpose, and I really would love to see it turned off, or at minimum, be a user setting How would you like the feature to work - Do not scroll, zoom or modify my view when I copy/paste modules, run scenarios or add notes
Description - it is not possible to configure sharing option in project template's tasks. Why is this feature important to you - This way I dont need to go to each task of the project and add/remove sharing permissions manually.How would you like the feature to work - when create a project template, I would like to be able to sharing permissions on tasks level and this way it won't inherit from the project template permissions.Current Behaviour - When create a project template, on the Tasks level doenst there is no option for sharing permission.Attached file for reference.
We use both Issues and Tasks and at times they need to be related to track progress w/o having one resolving the other. Sometimes 1 issue may be related to another issue (or multiple issues), and 1 or multiple tasks. It would be great to have a place in both the Issue view and Task view to relate to other Issues/Tasks without them resolving the Issue. The relationship should be in a hyperlink format so someone can easily click into it and open in another browser page. It should easily identifiable/displayed as with the Issue/Task Number, Name. When searching or typing into the field in an attempt to link to another item, it would be great to be able to type in the Issue/Task # or the name of the Issue/Task and be returned with a list to select from. The related items should appear on both ends (e.g. from the Ticket view and from the Task view). It would also be great to display the status of the item alongside the Ticket/Task #, Name.
Currently in AJO email designer, dynamic content can be applied to different sections of the email creative. So perhaps there are a few variations of the main image, the variations are based on segments (if Segment 1, display content A1; if Segment 2, display content A2, if Segment 3, display content A3, if Segment 4, display content A4). A few different variations of the body text based on other segments (if Segment 1 or 2, display content B1; if Segment 3 or 4, display Content B2). So as a general ask is how do we report based on dynamic content breakdown; so ideally we want to compare at both the content level as well as the segment level. So how is Segment 1 doing as compared to Segment 2 and Segment 3 and Segment 4 in terms of opens/clicks. And how is Content A1/A2/A3/A4 doing from opens and clicks comparison perspective. So we would like to see some kind of Segment or Selection Criteria (since it could also be attribute based) + Content version both be recorded as part of the contact history logs (feedback schema). And ideally we would like to see this kind of reporting in the AJO email reporting interface without having to going to CJA. CJA can perhaps be helpful for more custom reporting if the out of box reporting through AJO email reporting interface is not sufficient. Anybody has any comments/additional ideas about this? Thanks!
Description - Implement a storage view/tab inside "License usage" tab. Why is this feature important to you - We would like to know not only the percentage we are using, but, how this storage is distributed. For example, how much data does a dataset have. So we can know where we should optimise more. How would you like the feature to work - A dashboard that shows how much data does a dataset have. May be an average event weight would be appreciated. Current Behaviour - Currently we can only see the percentage and the estimation of last month for a dataset, not it's entire weight. Description:Currently, the "License Usage" tab only displays the overall storage percentage. This lacks detailed insights into actual storage distribution.Desired Feature:Implement a dedicated storage view/tab within "License Usage" that provides granular storage information.Specifically:A dashboard or a table displaying the total storage used by each dataset.(Optional) Include an average event or atribute weight metric for each dataset.Benefit:This feature would enable us to:Understand the storage footprint of individual datasets.Identify areas for storage optimization based on actual data volume.Make informed decisions about data management and resource allocation.
Description - When creating a new report suite by copying an existing one, certain settings are not carried over. Currently, users must manually review and compare each setting between the original and copied report suite, which is a tedious and time-consuming process. Why is this feature important to you -Many clients frequently create copies of original report suites to track regional or country-specific site traffic. Manually verifying each setting is inefficient and requires significant effort, leading to delays and potential inconsistencies. How would you like the feature to work -An interface should be available to compare the settings of two report suites side by side. This would minimize manual effort, streamline the process, and provide a clear view of which settings are not copied over during duplication. Current Behaviour -There is no existing interface to facilitate report suite settings comparison.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: I would like to be able to dehibernate my sandbox environments in a script using the Cloudmanger API (and CLI plugin). Use-case: My sandbox environments go down into hibernation daily, and once I get to development, I need to start the first, eating away 10 minutes every day.I would like to send the de-hibernation signals once i open my laptop in the morning - through a script using the Cloudmanager API or the aio cloudmanager plugin. I have tried to use the Call using from the CM-UI, but I did not get a positive response: Request URL: https://dev-console-ns-team-aem-cm-prd-n108153.ethos14-prod-deu6.dev.adobeaemcloud.com/api/releases/ns-team-aem-cm-prd-n108153/dehibernate/cm-p127553-e1403927 Path: /api/releases/ns-team-aem-cm-prd-n108153/dehibernate/cm-p127553-e1403927 Current/Experienced Behavior: Sanboxes are all hybernated, I have to spin them all up one-by-one manually. (this is very time-consuming ... and annoying!) Improved/Expected Behavior: When I open/start my laptop, the Sandboxes get dehybernated automatically through scripted calls. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM CloudSerices Cloudmanager (API) Customer-name/Organization name: CDA11DC661266AB70A495F8B@AdobeOrg Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
It would be nice to disable the auto-save feature or at least have an undo. The issue is 2 fold.1. It makes the process of updating much longer. For instance, when updating the settings section in an email. After clicking operational email it saves, then clicking include webpage link it saves, after updating the email address it saves, after updating send name it saves. Thus, making a 5 second task 45+ seconds. 2. The real issue arises when updating emails, forms etc. Recently our collateral designer created an email. He unknowingly had two windows open to the same email. After completing the email in one window, it saved. Later, he was going through his open windows and came across the second window he had opened to the previously completed email. The blank email then auto saved when he clicked on it. His completed email was over written by the blank email. Since, the email had never been approved all work was lost.
Description - When filtering on Milestone Path values, the current implementation shows all available values for all Paths. This creates confusion if 2 or more Milestone Paths define the same value. This can happen if there are different path values for different groups, with overlapping values. Since the Milestone Paths have a group selection to limit access, this same group selection should limit which path values are visible in filters. Why is this feature important to you - Milestone Path access is controlled by groups, but the values visible to end users for filtering are not. This can create confusion if the same value exists across Milestone Path definitions. How would you like the feature to work - Filtering on milestone ID or Milestone Name should be limited to the values in Milestone Paths the user has permission to see. Current Behaviour - Milestone Id filter is not restricting which values show up, which can show multiple values with the same name with no differentiation or indicator of the path it is on.
We made a report that uses the Stacked Bar chart feature to try and layout how long each project mile stone takes in comparison with all of the other milestones (Picture attached). These are stacked by MileStones, but the milestones are not in the order that we want them to be and there's no way to change the order. The milestones should be in the same order as the MileStone path that is setup. The easiest fix that we can think of is that the chart should allow us to choose a sort order for the chart fields. Workaround (we think), make a custom field that Concatenates Mile Stone Sequence with the name of the Mile Stone. It'd be "1"+" Mile Stone Name One"
Currently we use a type-ahead field for our users to locate an existing Campaign. We renamed the object Program to Campaign. If you look in the Overview section of a project, you can only search for those programs that are associated to a particular portfolio. Unfortunately, that logic is not carried through for other searching. When a requestor makes a request, we ask if there is an existing campaign and if there is we ask them to use a type ahead search to locate the campaign. Since there is no logic within the request process to filter only on those campaigns associated to a specific portfolio there is a higher possibility for the user to select the wrong campaign. We would also like a way to limit the search of a type-ahead on only active campaigns, today you can pick a campaign that was created 5 years ago. Please reference support case 00426130.
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.
