Locking down functionality of an app

Product Suggestions
1

Dear all,
We are working to develop applications that countries will then take and localize. Within an app there will be functionality that sites will need to edit, but some configuration they shouldnt touch. I know we now have the compare tool that will help, but it would be good if we could potentially have the ability to lock down certain parts of an app including triggers so that they cannot be edited.

2

Thanks for the post, @clark_john_david ,

We’re investigating better content management flows over the next few quarters, including the ability to define standardized content/logic and distributing that to sites.

Our first step in this direction will be Functions - reusable trigger logic, broken out into a separate Primitive. To start with, Functions will behave similarly to Connectors and can be used and published with Apps. It’s possible that in the future this may change to have a separate publish cycle – we’d like to see how folks use the first production release, and what’s valuable as the second step.

Would you be interested in checking out our initial scope and offering feedback? We’re scheduling User Interviews now (early March), and can give early access to a Sandbox Release likely in April/May. If this sounds interesting, let us know and we’ll get a chat set up.

Note to the Community: this offer stands broadly. We’ll be posting more info about the Functions initial release scope shortly, and will be asking folks which Functions they’d build first … or what’s missing in the first release scope - super valuable as we plan the second iteration.

1 Like
3

Hello Olga, that sounds great. Would be great to be involved.

4

Hey @clark_john_david , excited to speak with you further!

Just curious, when you want to “lock down certain parts of an app”, what level of granularity would you find helpful here, are you thinking about locking down the i.e. step level, base layout, widget level, individual triggers, and/or other widget properties (color, text, etc.)?

Thanks,
Max

5

I have been working on a torque device testing application for a while - there is potential for this to become an enterprise standard.

One thing we have done in anticipation of that is to modularize the applications - so the actual test execution app–with all the data handling trigger logic–has essentially no customization and could be identified as being “locked”, but the apps for the steps before and after testing (create/update device record, recieve devices, plan/pick/ship devices) are separate and could be customized for local business practices.

3 Likes
6

I would say trigger level, but some triggers we will require edits.

1 Like
7

For Functions, could there be an approval process similar to that for applications? This would be important for Life Science / GxP.

8

Hi @jmlowden ,

In the first release, Functions would follow the publication and review cycle of Connectors, i.e. be part of the App approval flow.

In future, we could try to publish/review Functions separately. This is something we are thinking about but don’t have concrete plans for yet. We’d love to chat with you to get your use case.

In general, we’ll be posting about Functions shortly on Community, and will be offering time to chat, plan your first Functions, share our scope for the first production release, and see what would be valuable after that for your team.

  • Olga