When viewing the revisions, the required scripts do not appear in the revision on either side, despite showing that there were changes made to the block (Block1 in the example). It would be good to be able to view the required scripts changed in the block. This happens in both O11 and ODC.

Hi, ODC PE navigation and functionalities have bugs and logic isn't user friendly. 1.1. Cannot login with the username and password from the owner of the environment in an app. 1.2. Cannot edit created users or add a password to them. Name keeps as "Unnamed user". 1.3. Result: without proper setting up the users, we cannot use the apps that we test before implementing them in the client. 2. Remember Me in ODC login doesn't work. After several minutes we need to insert credentials again. 3. Login in ODC Studio should be available inside the app, without needing to do it in the browser. Browser login should act independently, specially if we want to login in apps with other users. 4. Make available Login action in server side so that a system user can be added 5. There isn't a button to open ODC Studio without opening an app. 6. Add more logs to the Logs, like we have in O11 Service Center. Just published an app and gave an error and nothing appear in the logs. We need to have more in-depth information in the logs. 7. Messages used in "LogMessage" action don't appear in the logs. 8. Add sort in apps in ODC for Created Date. 9. Add details in ODC in each functionality. 10. Add details in Platform Updates to know the impact of updating. Note: A Developer should have control at all times of what he is doing. For that, more information is needed and ODC doesn't provide enough control on performed actions or in logs. There are several O11 features that should be implemented in ODC. Simple is not always better, specially in an enterprise platform, as control should be the drive in this case.

Hello, It once existed... but it doesn't anymore. https://www.outsystems.com/ideas/1673/bundling-and-minifying-the-javascript-css-files/ When we publish a solution that has a mechanism to minifying CSS and JS - well, it could be a checkbox that the user chooses whether or not they want this option, and it might not be available in the free version... But that could benefit the performance of applications.

 TLDR: CSS Layers are a way to define order of precedence in the case of multiple cascade layers. The suggestion is to implement a way to define these layers, to further improve the development of custom themes and layouts. Why?Being able to define cascade layers allows the developers to separate stylesheets into a hierarchy of priority. Quoting the MDN article:"[A cascade layer] enables the creation of simpler CSS selectors because you do not have to ensure that a selector will have high enough specificity to override competing rules; all you need to ensure is that it appears in a later layer."In practical OutSystems terms, this means that the OutSystems UI stylesheet could sit in an early layer while the Custom Theme of an application could be placed in a later layer, hence avoiding overriding conflicts with existing rules. Furthermore, in environments where a Custom Theme exists, but a superset theme is applied to specific applications, conflicts of specificity could also be avoided. How?This layer definition could be placed in a per-CSS file basis: it's just another parameter like "Name", "Description", "Public", etc. The layer order (or precedence list) could be defined in the Theme Editor, or be set in Service Center.

Currently, when replying to a forum post , we use the " @ " symbol to mention a person, but users need to manually search for the name they want to mention. I propose an enhancement where, as soon as the " @ " symbol is typed in a forum reply, a list of users who have already replied to that specific thread automatically appears. This will allow users to easily select the name they want to mention without having to search for it. This feature would improve the user experience by saving time and making the process more intuitive.

An app where developers can create AI Agents using Mentor inside ODC, guided, structured, and production-ready. A lightweight app that helps developers: Define an Agent purpose Generate the System Prompt Suggest Actions Recommend Grounding strategy Propose Memory configuration All using AI guidance with Mentor.

Implement an additional functionality that allows searching for all uses of a CSS class across all consumer modules of that stylesheet. The front-end teams would greatly benefit from this measure, as it streamlines development and enhances maintenance processes.

Instead of having only a straight line, see forum post: https://www.outsystems.com/forums/discussion/5275/action-flow-how-to-make-angles-in-connectors-lines/

Sometimes we launch a deployment, you go back the next day thinking the teams have the new features on the target enviroment and... sorprise! it´s sttoped waiting for confirmation for the impact on running business processes, and loose several hours for the deployment start and finish. Also, if you have two steps, this question it´s asking two times! (if always review on stage 2, please, don´t ask on stage 1). Something than could be ideal for us if you have a parameter to say if you want to ask or not the impact on the running business processes so the LT don´t ask and continue with the deployment (something that works as deployment in two stages, that you can decide in wich enviroments you want to ask or not).

Looking at the authorizations offered while creating the connection to MCP (Model Context Protocol), all the options related to (OAuth) ask for a client secret as a mandatory field. While searching on MCP Documentation, the client side must implement a PKCE (Proof Key of Code Exchange) flow, with this flow its not mandatory to have a client secret to get Authorization to interact with the MCP Server. Making a lot of MCP Servers impossible to connect to OutSystems. Where is the link for the documentation where they explain why PKCE flow should be mandatory: https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-11-25/basic/authorization#authorization-code-protection My suggestion here is to make client secret not mandatory.