Product Communities

I took the AD0-E559 Adobe Marketo Engage Business Practitioner Expert exam last week and passed, but I’d like to review which areas I answered incorrectly. Does anyone know if there’s a way to access that information?

It would be extremely helpful if the Adobe Cloud Manager UI displayed clear information on which user initiated a pipeline execution as well as which user approved or rejected the pipeline in the approval step.Today, identifying who triggered or approved a pipeline often requires navigating through logs or API calls, which is not intuitive. Having this information surfaced directly in the Cloud Manager interface would provide:Better traceability – Quickly identify the person responsible for starting a deployment or making an approval decision. Improved auditability – Essential for teams that must comply with governance, security, or compliance standards. Faster troubleshooting – When a deployment causes issues, teams can easily see who initiated or approved the pipeline and follow up with the appropriate individual. Enhanced collaboration – Team members and stakeholders can more effectively coordinate by knowing who has taken action at each stage.Displaying the triggering user and the

Hi Experience League Community,   We are troubleshooting an issue with AEM Universal Editor in an Edge Delivery Services project.   The copy/paste functionality for components between pages was working before, but it recently stopped working. Authors can open and edit pages in Universal Editor, but when they try to copy a component from one page and paste it into another page, the paste action does not complete as  expected.   We have started reviewing Author logs and browser network traces, but we are not yet sure which area is most relevant to investigate.   We would appreciate guidance on what else to check, for example:   1. Universal Editor component definitions, models, or filters  2. Edge Delivery Services Configuration Service settings  3. Site/repository/branch configuration  4. Author permissions or access restrictions  5. Browser/network requests involved in copy/paste  6. Known limitations when copying components across pages or language/site branches  7. Any relevant Autho

Hi I have a project where the project-level schedule is set to A.At the user level, the assignee has a schedule set to B.The project is configured with "Consider user time off in task durations" enabled.My understanding is that for a task with this setup (one task, one assignee), the task start and end dates would take both schedule A and schedule B into account.In other words, if schedule A includes US holidays and schedule B includes UK holidays, the task would start on a day that is not a holiday in either country.However, in my testing this does not seem to be the case. Am I misunderstanding how this works?

Looking to see if there are any users in the Greenville, South Carolina area to create a local Workfront User Group.

Hello Workfront Community,    I can’t believe it’s already June! Time has flown by since our last review, but I wanted to update you all on our H1 2025 Community Ideas review. As you may recall, this effort is part of our bi-annual ideas review process, which involves our product team as they review and respond to the top 20 ideas from the past 2 years. Please note that this 2-year period includes ideas from our last review cycle in November 2024. Ideas from our last review cycle are listed in the second chart below, labelled ‘H2 2024 Carryover Ideas.’ Many of you may have already been notified of these idea updates if you’ve interacted with them previously, but I wanted to consolidate all product responses into a single page.    A couple things to keep in mind:    All reviewed ideas below were published in the past 2 years.   Ideas responded to in this cycle will be updated periodically by the PM Owner until they are moved to a 'final’ stage,

After a promo email went out, we got a huge spike from Microsoft-based IPs. I believe we got about 300K UV in 4 hours, so it’s likely from their email scanners. This seems like an old problem that is popping up again in 2026. Does anyone have a way to mitigate reporting this traffic as UVs? We’re using Cloudflare, but they even bypassed that.

Please add ‘Entered by’ to the list of fields available in a ‘Billing Record’ report.  Being able to audit who entered a ‘Billing Record’ is critical when you’re dealing with finance issues, we were surprised this wasn’t possible already. You can find a thread about this issue here:    

We are preparing assets for migration and need to deactivate and delete assets and folder that aren’t referenced.Is there an automated to do this, including reporting on the assets deleted and retained?

Hello AJO Community,According to https://experienceleague.adobe.com/en/docs/journey-optimizer/using/orchestrate-journeys/about-journey-building/audience-qualification-events , there is a potential lag of 30min for Streaming Audiences to enter journeys with the Audience Qualification node and if you need real-time entry, a unitary event should be used. But what about Edge Audiences with the Audience Qualification node? Does that not allow for real-time journey entry or is there a similar lag there as well?

Hi Team,I know Marketo has a process for handling feedback loops when spam complaints are reported by ISPs. However, we also include a distribution list on emails sent through Marketo, and we occasionally receive automated responses indicating that a recipient is no longer with the company or that their email address has changed.I wanted to understand the recommended approach for handling these cases. Is there a way to automate the processing of these notifications, or should they be managed manually? For example, should we unsubscribe/remove these records from the data depending on their response?, update the email address when a new one is provided, or follow a different process?I’d appreciate any feedback or best practices you can share.Regards,Akshat

How Adobe Dynamic Media Templates close the gap — delivering personalized content at scale from a single URL. For the designers, marketers, and developers who have to make personalization actually happen. The personalization imperative Personalization isn't a nice-to-have anymore - it's the default customers expect. As per this McKinsey study, 71% of consumers expect companies to deliver personalized interactions, and 76% get frustrated when this doesn't happen. And it pays: companies that grow faster drive 40% more of their revenue from personalization than their slower-growing peers.So the mandate is clear. The problem is delivering on it. The content scale crisis Personalized marketing demands creative at a scale no design team can hand-produce. Every product needs creative for every channel, in every language, for every audience, refreshed every campaign - and those factors don't add up, they multiply. Run the numbers for a single year: 8 products × 15 channels × 35 languages × 10

When i switch to target mode from edit mode , i am not able to see the style system (Paint brush) icon to select the styles from my style system. This is across all of my components and i dont want to make so many changes now. I tried including those options at dialog level in separate styles tab using<styletab                        jcr:primaryType="nt:unstructured"                        sling:resourceType="granite/ui/components/coral/foundation/include"                        path="/mnt/overlay/cq/gui/components/authoring/dialog/style/tab_design/styletab"/>but even that style tab in dialog goes missing when i use target mode.Even when i use some styles in edit mode and then go to target mode to target the component , then also my default universal styles which were applied in edit mode before targeting the component are being removed.Can someone help me here? I dont want to change all the components now, need some universal solution.

When specific property is not explicitly deifned under config.publish.dev, the system automatically merges/inherits the property value defined under config.publish. Steps to Reproduce:Create a configuration with few values under config.publish.dev. Create a configuration with the same PID as defined earlier under config.publish, and update the values, include new property which was not defined as part of config.publish.dev. Deploy to cloud dev environment. Observe that the dev environment uses the value from config.publish while there is existing configuration file for config.publish.dev without any vlaue for the new property.This issue occurs on all runmodes.As per this document https://experienceleague.adobe.com/en/docs/experience-manager-cloud-service/content/implementing/deploying/configuring-osgi#runmode-resolution,There is no property-level merging between runmode specific folders for the same PID. AEM selects only one configuration which is having most matching runmodes.Please l

A lot came out last week. Here's a quick breakdown for anyone who hasn't dug into the release notes yet.Unified Review and Approvals connector This is the headline. A native connector for Workfront's approval workflow, create and update approval stages, add participants, send reminders, make decisions, retrieve approval status, and even get suggested approvers. Previously you'd need custom API calls to automate any of this. Now it's native modules, which means cleaner scenarios and easier maintenance.I'm planning to use this as part of a content supply chain automation :- Fusion watches for an approval decision in Workfront, then automatically triggers the downstream action in AEM without anyone manually checking the outcome. Will share more once it's built.New Fusion API endpoints Fusion now has a significantly expanded API for managing Fusion itself. You can programmatically list, clone, and export scenarios, pull execution history, manage connections, data stores, folders, and webho

We're launching the Adobe Workfront User Group – Seattle chapter, and we want you in from the start.Grab your coffee and join your Chapter Leaders, Chris Lew and Thomas Scott Adams, virtually on July 21 at 9amPT for the first gathering of Workfront users across the Pacific Northwest. Whether you're an admin, project manager, or just getting started with Workfront — this is your community.We'll make introductions, share the chapter's vision, and hear directly from you about what you want to see next. Come ready to connect with peers who get it.RSVP today! https://workfront-augs.adobe.com/events/details/adobe-workfront-wug-seattle-presents-wug-seattle-kickoff-meeting/

I have some content fragments defined in a project folder. I then went to the configuration manager and created a policy that enabled content fragments models in the configuration folder then also enabled GraphQL as well. I then applied that policy to my parent folder for assets, where I planned to create the content fragments. I was then unable to see my content fragment models when I tried to create a content fragment in that folder or child folders that were set to the default inheritance. When I moved my models to the global folder (I don’t think this should be the resolution) I could then see my defined models.I would prefer to do this correctly and use the content fragments in the project folder so they can be added to source control without affecting other configurations.What could be a reason that I am not able to see the project specific models, but I can if see the models in the global folder. Again, I followed the directions on creating a policy to allow the project models.

Dear AEP Community,Your time is precious, and we understand the importance of efficiency when it comes to troubleshooting issues with Adobe Experience Platform.That's why we're excited to again bring you our carefully curated collection of Top KCS (Knowledge-Base) Articles for June 2026, designed to help you resolve common challenges swiftly and effectively.Our Top KCS Articles are your shortcut to:Quickly identifying and resolving recurring issues. Accessing expert insights and best practices for AEP. Streamlining your troubleshooting process for maximum productivity. Empowering yourself with the knowledge to tackle any AEP-related problem head-on.Why spend hours searching for solutions, when our Top KCS Articles have already done the heavy lifting for you?Let us help you save time so you can focus on what truly matters – creating highly personalized digital experiences with AEP.Start supercharging your problem-solving skills today by exploring our Top KCS Articles! Take a look:Custom

Thanks to everyone who joined today’s workshop on Mastering Business Rules and Validation Logic in Adobe Workfront! The session was led by Adobe Workfront’s Tina Craig, Principal Business Consultant, Content Supply Chain, who shared several examples and best practices for using these new features to help with governance (and reduce the redundant reminders from admins)! Workshop Summary:Validation logic prevents form submission when criteria are met; business rules prevent object creation, deletion, and editing across system. Validation logic uses if-then statements on custom form fields; business rules are configured in the Setup area with broader scope (only available to customers on the Workflow Ultimate package). Practical examples like special character restrictions, character limits, date constraints, SLA enforcement, and multi-option selections were demo’ed.  Remember! Always test in Sandbox before production deployment to prevent workflow disruption. If you weren’t able to join