Provide a " Check for Updates " / " Update Now " option in both ODC Studio and O11 Service Studio , allowing developers to manually check for and install the latest Studio version . This would be useful when automatic updates don't trigger or when developers want to control when the Studio application is updated. Proposed option: Help → Check for Updates

Be able to create a unit test for a Server / Service / Client (?) / Screen (?) action that shall be executed without developer intervention, for regression purposes.

Hi Outsystems teams, Since the OS charing static entity for 1 AO, to save some cost for clients, in many projects, we hardly use static-entity even though it should use Static-entity for many purposes. We need to use alternative ways to implement the static concept, like using structure, hardcode... This led the development become more complex in design, implement, and more hard-code used, but we can't spend 1 AO for just 5 records stored in static-entity like status, type, etc... Actually many projects opened just to Delete all static entity from the code to save cost. From begining we've learnt how to use Static entity, and in real project we need to learn how to not use Static entity to save AO, this make static entity very dead. Can Outsystems consider to lower the price of AO somehow like count it 1 AO = 3 or 4 static entity, or consider make it free if there are < 10 record store in static entity, this would be a great thing for Outsystems developers and clients. Thanks :)

The new option to publish with an added message is very nice, but too often I forget to click the dropdown arrow and accidentally Publish normally. Because there is no way to add a message after already publishing, this can get quite annoying. I suggest a simple extra configuration checkbox in the Service Studio Preferences to optionally change the "with Message" option to be the default. When enabled, Normal publish should still be available through the dropdown arrow.

OutSystems provides useful list actions such as ListSort, ListFilter, ListAny, ListAll, and ListIndexOf, but there is no built-in action to directly compare two lists. Currently, comparing two lists often requires multiple For Each loops combined with ListAny, ListFilter, or ListIndexOf. This can make the logic more complex and may require unnecessary processing, especially for larger lists. A built-in ListCompare function could support common scenarios such as: Check if two lists are equal Find items added or removed This would reduce repetitive logic, improve readability, and provide a standardized and potentially more optimized way to handle list comparisons. It would be a useful addition alongside the existing OutSystems list operations.

Hi, I've run into this a few times. I would like to have the ability to do a simple query with an IN clause, without having to rely on advanced queries. It should accept a list of Identifier. Today we do ( from an aggregate perspective): SELECT * FROM {TASKS} WHERE id = 1 or id = 2 or id = 3 But it would be really awesome if we could do SELECT * FROM {Tasks} WHERE id in (1,2,3) This allows us to do some pretty cool stuff with Lists setc ( eg you can now shim some of the more advanced sql functionality without writing advanced queries). An example would be: myList = SELECT id from People WHERE OrganisationId = 2 SELECT * FROM {Tasks} WHERE personId = myList Which would be 2 actions, and somewhat faster/cleaner than the current way Writing an advanced query ( frowned up by my companies' best practices guide - and I've also found advanced queries tend to be annoying to manage ) Looping through myList and putting the outputs into another list, which is then passed around (this also has a few nasties - lots of DB hits (albeit small ones), and refreshing this with paging is a pain

 The Problem When an External Logic component is published to the Forge today, the author uploads a pre-compiled binary. A git repository link can optionally be included, but it is purely decorative, OutSystems does not verify any relationship between the linked source and the uploaded artifact. This means that as a consumer, when you install an external logic Forge component, you are executing code you cannot verify. You are trusting the author's word that what they linked on GitHub is what's actually running in your tenant. This is a real supply-chain risk — even with good intentions, a compromised account, a build-time dependency swap, or a simple mistake can result in consumers running code that doesn't match the published source. The Proposal Require that External Logic components submitted to the Forge are cryptographically linked to a public git repository at a specific commit, and that the submission process enforces this linkage — not just documents it optionally. The flow would look like this: The publisher develops and uploads their External Logic to their tenant as today (nothing changes here) When submitting to the Forge, they are required to provide a public git repository URL and a pinned tag or commit SHA that corresponds to the uploaded binary The Forge stores a SHA-256 checksum of the uploaded artifact alongside the source reference Consumers can inspect the source at the pinned commit, and optionally build it locally to verify the checksum matches what they'll be installing This doesn't change the upload mechanics, it adds an auditable envelope around what's already there. This is the same trust model used by mainstream package ecosystems: go install github.com/user/repo@v1.2.3 — builds from source at a verified tag cargo install --git — fetches and compiles from a git ref crates.io — stores checksums and optionally verifies builds server-side Why This Matters Transparency: consumers know exactly what code runs in their tenant, down to the commit Supply-chain integrity: eliminates the "binary black box" problem; no more trusting an uploaded artifact blindly Community accountability: published source is public and auditable; the community can catch issues before they spread O11's Integration Studio was transparent by design, you could open an XIF and see exactly what was there. ODC External Logic moved us forward in capability but took a step back in auditability. This proposal closes that gap, in a modern and supply-chain-secure way.

In OutSystems Platform publishing is like comitting your changes to Version Management. It would be extremely helpful to be able to add comments on the 1 Click Publish process. This would be even more flexible if one could drill down these comments by changed object (webscreen, webblock, action, webreference action, etc)

A centralized Developer Cheat Sheet for OutSystems Developer Cloud (ODC) would greatly help both new and experienced developers quickly understand and adopt the platform. Similar to the existing O11 cheat sheet, this should provide a concise overview of key ODC concepts, architecture, development flow, best practices, and differences from O11. It would serve as a quick reference guide to help developers ramp up faster and become productive in ODC projects with minimal learning curve. This resource would be especially useful for: New developers getting started with ODC Experienced O11 developers transitioning to ODC Teams looking for a quick refresher on core concepts Providing such a cheat sheet would improve onboarding efficiency, reduce confusion, and accelerate project delivery within the ODC ecosystem.

As we are now having folders everywhere, please do the same for service studio main screen. This way applications can be grouped by context.