Hello community! Today, I want to talk about an idea that I believe may not be entirely new, but I haven't seen many approaches to it, so I decided to write it in a more structured way. (The most similar idea I found was this: Translation Teams ) The idea is allowing community members to contribute in translating OutSystems documentation. I'll explain why and how I envision this implementation. Why? Regardless of the language we speak, we all prefer reading and hearing our mother tongue, as it resonates differently in our hearts. A study in the NeuroImage journal concluded that there are structural differences in the brain connections of people with different native languages. ( Native language differences in the structural connectome of the human brain ) If our mother tongue influences our brain in this way, it will undoubtedly impact how we learn, whether in our native language or in a language learned later in life, such as English. Considering this, I believe translated documentation can significantly enhance a user's information processing, accelerating their learning and development . But what about English? We all know it's crucial for developers to read and communicate in English for various reasons. Documentation helps in this! Yes, I don't deny that. My goal is not to translate all content or dismiss English . I propose implementing translation to help in studying/understanding documentation. How? The idea is simple. Community members submit translated documentation to OutSystems. The translation team (if it exists) reviews and, upon approval, makes it available. Questions may arise: How many languages? Translating documentation into every language is unrealistic. Initially, I suggest translating into the world's top 5 or 10 most spoken languages, covering a large audience and gauging project success. Members suggesting translations? That's crazy! There could be errors or trolls! Various measures can prevent these scenarios. I propose limiting the number of members suggesting translations: - Only active or higher-ranked members can suggest translations; - Members with specific certifications/proven technical knowledge can suggest translations; - Only MVPs or Champions can suggest translations; - Members must apply for a "translation program", proving linguistic abilities for specific articles/languages; - A combination of the above. Members could use tools like Google Translate or AI! True. For that members might be evaluated for translation skills, and OutSystems could verify translations. Using translation tools doesn't necessarily mean poor quality; it just requires validation. OutSystems just did this with AI translation for Japanese! Yes and no. While OutSystems' implementation is excellent for forums, it may not suit documentation. AI may not grasp documentation contexts, leading to empty translations. Reliable translations by professionals understanding the original message, context, and technical aspects would be more valuable than AI translations. This is my idea. It's complex and may not be as easy to implement as it seems. It would take time and effort, but I believe it would be a great addition to this constantly evolving community in need of skilled developers. This implementation would not only expand OutSystems' reach but also enhance every user's experience and learning! Please share your thoughts on my idea. If you have questions, ask, and I'll respond if I can. Support it if you find it valid and would like to see it implemented. Cheers, Mauro Alviza

 Vision Develop a Corona Volunteer App to engage the citizen, researchers and authorities in anonymous  information collection with the common goal to increase knowledge of the Corona virus and provide estimated real time overview of the spread of the Corona virus* Enables new learning about the Corona VirusEngage all citizens of the country 18 years and older via an Android / iOS app in information gathering by allowing individuals to contribute input about themselves and their family's possible corona situation (symptoms) - Anonymously.Only birth year, postal code, and gender will be registered as personal information.Give researchers access to statistics and raw data from the voluntary workGive the authorities access to statistics from the voluntary workProvide registered citizen with statistics on the spread of corona down to the postcode detail level Gather daily health status from each citizen (including corona test result) with easy status and symptom selections.This may reveal possible hidden Corona infectionsProvide knowledge of symptoms throughout the illness periodGive the average length of the diseaseProvide information about incubation periodReveals unknow corona infection casesMake the authorities know the health status of people at home –Easier to know the effect of the current measures and to plan for future measures.The goal is to make this app available internationally  and to empower us all to participate in constructive work to fight the Corona Virus!Join the fight! *Cooperation with medical expert advisors has already been secured.

When looking for components in the forge, a big "green flag" is the "trusted" badge. Right now, from the 7033 components available, only 63 are trusted (<1%). It seems to me that the community would greatly benefit from more trusted components. From my experience, asset reviews are not being conducted - I have assets awaiting review for more than a year, and I'm sure people have been waiting a lot longer. I see multiple benefits from OutSystems dedicating more resources to the asset review process: More trustworthy components Feedback loop - developers will learn how to build better components Incentivization - developers will know that getting the trusted badge is a possibility and will produce higher quality assets Etc.

 Problem: Even after years of development, maintaining consistent code quality across large teams is a persistent challenge. Despite the existence of best-practice documentation, junior and even senior developers frequently bypass critical standards—such as proper documentation, naming conventions, Max. Records settings, or inefficient operations like lists within loops. Currently, code review is a manual, reactive process that happens too late in the development lifecycle. Proposed Solution: I propose a new "Governance Gatekeeper" feature for Service Studio, powered by existing AI Mentor capabilities, that moves code quality from "suggestion" to "enforcement." Policy-Driven Publishing: Allow Admins to configure a set of "Strict Quality Rules" for specific modules. If the modified code fails to meet these pre-defined standards (e.g., missing descriptions, non-compliant naming, or performance anti-patterns), the 1-Click Publish button is disabled, preventing the deployment of substandard code. Granular Control: Provide the ability to toggle these restrictions on or off per module or application. This allows organizations to apply strict "Production-Level" enforcement on core systems while maintaining flexibility in "Sandbox," "Learning," or "PoC" modules. AI-Powered Feedback: Integrate the AI Mentor to not only block the publish action but to provide a clear, real-time "Action Plan" telling the developer exactly what needs to be fixed to unlock the publish button. Impact: By integrating automated enforcement into the development loop, we can: Guarantee Technical Debt Reduction: Prevent bad patterns from entering the codebase at the source. Scale Mentorship: Use the platform to train developers in real-time, effectively automating the role of a lead developer in enforcing standards. Elevate Enterprise Reliability: Ensure that all production-bound code meets a uniform level of quality, documentation, and performance before it ever hits the server. Thanks

Hello! I would like to propose a feature enhancement for AI Mentor that would allow manual synchronization of one or more specific applications via an API. This capability would be highly beneficial, particularly for teams integrating AI Mentor into a CI/CD pipeline to improve application quality. Why This is Important Currently, AI Mentor’s synchronization process covers the entire factory and follows a periodic schedule, which does not align well with CI/CD workflows. In modern development practices, quality checks need to be integrated at key points in the pipeline, ensuring that applications are analyzed at the right time—before deployment, after code changes, or during specific release stages. Proposed Solution Providing an API endpoint to trigger synchronization for selected applications would enable: Faster Quality Feedback: Developers can validate application health immediately after changes, reducing the time to detect and fix issues. Efficient Resource Usage: Instead of scanning the entire factory, teams can focus AI Mentor’s analysis on the relevant applications, optimizing processing time. Improved CI/CD Integration: This would enable seamless automation within pipelines, ensuring that applications meet quality standards before reaching production. This addition would greatly enhance AI Mentor’s usability in enterprise DevOps environments. Looking forward to your thoughts. Best regards,

Allow entities Exposed Read-Only in O11 to have their Wrapper Actions explicitly mapped as well, and represented as entity actions in ODC. This would guarantee that business rules implemented in O11 are applied when accessed from ODC and eliminates the need for extraneous REST APIs solely for data integration purposes.

My suggestion is to implement a feature that allows developers to find and remove unused CSS within all dependent modules and style sheets. This tool would help streamline application development by identifying redundant styles, leading to improved performance and easier maintenance.

Hi, There aren't proper descriptions or steps on how to get certain badges. For example, the badge "Interoperability O11 and ODC" says "Complete the “Future-Proofing your OutSystems Factory with O11 and ODC” Training program" but searching for “Future-Proofing your OutSystems Factory with O11 and ODC” there isn't any item in the list. Also, the filter in the "https://learn.outsystems.com/training/catalog" page only allows 50 characters.

As part of our ongoing effort to follow OutSystems best‑practice architecture, we have restructured our application landscape to clearly separate business logic from front‑end applications. While this approach improves modularity and maintainability, these applications still have interdependencies, which we group and manage as a logical Suite. When deploying to another environment using Lifetime, all module dependencies are automatically validated and republished as needed, and we are proactively notified of any breaking changes across dependent applications. This capability significantly reduces deployment risk and ensures consistency across the suite. It would be extremely valuable to have a comparable feature in Lifetime that allows us to publish a Deployment Plan within the same environment, while still performing full dependency validation. Ideally, this process would identify broken dependencies, prompt corrective action, and automatically republish all dependent applications as required. Implementing this capability would result in substantial time savings for developers. Today, deploying changes within the same environment often requires manually opening and publishing multiple modules in the correct order, with limited validation feedback and a high risk of human error. A unified, dependency‑aware deployment mechanism would both streamline this process and strengthen application stability. While we have implemented a workaround using Solutions in Service Center, it does not provide the same level of validation and dependency checks that Lifetime performs during cross‑environment deployments. Closing this gap would significantly improve deployment efficiency, reduce rework, and enhance overall application dependency management.

Hospitals will start having issues with ventilators during this high usage times that are approaching. After doing shifts for more than 48 hours it won't be easy for medical and technical staff to properly troubleshoot the cause.For instance, sometimes ventilators stop working and the problem is the UPS. What needs to be done is simply connect the ventilator to the energy outlet rather than the UPS.The purpose of this system will be to allow technical staff to submit issues with ventilators (by brand and model) and have specialists indicating possible solutions.