I suggest adding an arrow to collapse or expand code ranges in the JavaScript Editor, similar to the functionality already available in the CSS Editor. It would improve the usability when working with large blocks of code.

It would be interesting to allow the importation of several files and folders, suggesting as Target Directory the very structure indicated in the import.

Hello,A lot of OutSystems customers get confused regarding our Teams being Application Teams instead of User teams, and one scenario that they get confused with is that when they have multiple businesses/independent teams working inside the same infrastructure, they can't allow the users to create applications only inside their teams.The use case is that you have multiple independent teams working in your infrastructure, and you want them to be "somewhat" autonomous, but then in Lifetime you only really have 2 options:Give them permission to change and deploy as default so that they can create applications in your infrastructure, which means that they will have access to any application that they are not restricted to (Applications that are not on a team, which if you have many teams all creating applications, and they are all created without a team at first, will be a problem unless they have a very good internal process). And if you do this you still need to give someone access to assign the applications to your team, and you need to give them "Manage Teams and Application Roles" as default, and from the moment you do that, they can freely unassign/assign any user/application to any team, so in theory they have access to everything (since they can give themselves access to anything by unassigning an app from a team). So there's either no full autonomy or no full independence between the teams.Don't give them permissions to change and deploy as default and direct to some kind of infrastructure manager that responsibility, removing the autonomy from your developer teams since they always need to raise a ticket/ask the infra manager to create an app and assign it to one of the teams that they can actually change.So as you can see, as far as I know, there's no real workaround for this use case.In my opinion, one way of fixing this without creating a new permission layer would be a dropdown inside Service Studio when you are creating an application so that you could choose the "Application Teams" that you have Change & Deploy in and then allowing the users to create applications as long as they have Change & Deploy in at least one team and automatically assign the app to that team. The dropdown could include "No Team" if the user has Change & Deploy as default.The other option would be a new permission layer for user groups, which would mean being able to group your users (one user to only one team at any time), and then giving them permissions to applications assigned to that team (like the opposite of the Application Teams right now) would fix this issue, since then you could have List as default and change and deploy in your User Group, and all applications that you would create could be automatically assigned to your User Group.I hope the idea is clear enough, sorry for this wall of text!Thank you in advance!

At our company we found the need for customizable scaffolding. While it is possible to have scaffolded screens automatically use a style we found it would be handy if we could customize the scaffolding to automatically put actions like delete with our company style pictogram and change the edit into an edit popup with a special column for this edit and delete. etc. etc. Now we have to manually put a webblock inside every new screen we create and alter it with the correct names/ids. Really hope this feature will be in a future version!

In multiple enterprise conversations, a recurring concern I encounter is around long-term platform dependency and source code ownership. Prospective clients often ask whether, in a worst-case scenario or strategic pivot, they would have the ability to access and operationalize their application source code independently of the platform. To address this more effectively during pre-sales and architecture discussions, it would be extremely valuable to have a feature in the trial or demo environment that allows export of the application source code in a structured .NET format that can be deployed in a standard .NET setup. Having the ability to demonstrate this live would: Instantly reduce perceived vendor lock-in concerns Increase architectural confidence among CTOs and enterprise architects Accelerate decision cycles during evaluation Strengthen positioning against traditional custom development arguments In many cases, the hesitation is not about capability; it is about control and reversibility. If we can showcase that portability exists in a tangible way, it materially improves conversion confidence. This capability would significantly enhance enterprise adoption conversations.

Create a built-in function to Retrieve Environment Name from Environment Configuration in Service Center

When a country goes into lock-down, a lot of areas need to be secured by security personnel. The security branch is currently not organized enough to handle this centrally.We would like to build a portal where security personnel (and companies) can subscribe to projects (areas that need security) in order to keep a whole country safe during lock-down.

Hi Team, As we know OutSystems provides the automatic documentation generated for an exposed Rest API which is super helpful and can be shared among the developers as per the below link: https://success.outsystems.com/documentation/11/integration_with_external_systems/rest/expose_rest_apis/document_an_exposed_rest_api/ but not every organisation or client wants to expose the details of their API documentation without any authentication or anonymous. It will be super helpful, if there is any configurable option available to secure the exposed rest API documentation. Thanks, Manish Jawla

Hi OS Team, Why don't we have Conversion Assessment Tool for Cloud? I think this will be beneficial for some of the companies who has a Lift and Shift from On-Prem App to Cloud. As currently some of the companies who have On-Prem Setup has issues on installing the Conversion Assessment Tool on their environment.

Currently, the "OutSystems Mentor" title on member profile pages is static text. To better bridge our community with the global mentoring ecosystem, I propose making this title a clickable link. If a member is a verified mentor, clicking their title should redirect users directly to their ADPList mentor page. This streamlines the process for mentees to book sessions and view the mentor's full coaching credentials without manual searching.