Timeline for With USER_MODE - do we still need SOQL and DML libs?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
24 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 2, 2023 at 19:21 | vote | accept | Robert Sösemann | ||
| Apr 1, 2023 at 15:36 | history | edited | Robert Sösemann | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Mar 29, 2023 at 15:09 | history | edited | Robert Sösemann | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Mar 29, 2023 at 13:52 | answer | added | daveespo | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 22, 2023 at 11:22 | history | edited | Robert Sösemann | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Mar 22, 2023 at 10:49 | answer | added | Jeff Jin | timeline score: 3 | |
| Mar 22, 2023 at 8:48 | answer | added | Piotr Gajek | timeline score: 5 | |
| Mar 21, 2023 at 21:20 | history | edited | Robert Sösemann | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Mar 21, 2023 at 21:18 | comment | added | Robert Sösemann | C'mon guys, no comments orgies. Just put your valuable thoughts into well formatted answers. This is not school. This a free forum in free community. | |
| Mar 21, 2023 at 21:16 | comment | added | Jesús González | On the other hand, I'm not totally sure how the "user mode with permission set" would really fit in our packages. If the PS actually exists, what does retain the admins from assign them? How did the user triggered the feature? I might find it useful if we could create "protected" (hidden) permission sets as well... | |
| Mar 21, 2023 at 21:06 | comment | added | Jesús González | With the user mode, Salesforce has made a big step towards simplification that can help those libraries to perform better and provide an improved development experience. However, it is up to you to decide if you want to decouple the DB operations and how the security is actually implemented from the business code. E.g. Selectors are aiming code reuse and encapsulation. That's not something you can simply replace by using the new user mode. Moreover, unless the stubbing API comes with a magic formula, these tools are great for building true robust unit tests | |
| Mar 21, 2023 at 19:21 | comment | added | Phil W | @DavidSchach yes, we did discuss that briefly. It may help, but I still have a gut feeling we will hit some speed bumps with this. | |
| Mar 21, 2023 at 19:05 | comment | added | DavidSchach | @PhilW While there are some technical considerations, the "user mode with perm set" could also include a perm set group, which may satisfy your needs better and be more manageable? It would let you use existing user personas. | |
| Mar 21, 2023 at 15:54 | comment | added | cropredy | for fflib - seems like this should be posted as an issue on github apex-common - Dec 2022 added support for user_mode | |
| Mar 21, 2023 at 12:48 | review | Close votes | |||
| Mar 26, 2023 at 3:05 | |||||
| Mar 21, 2023 at 12:47 | comment | added | Robert Sösemann | @PhilW most answers on Stack are not complete. And answers by you even incomplete are often the most well-thought and high-ranked. | |
| Mar 21, 2023 at 12:35 | comment | added | Phil W |
Robert, it's not a real answer, since it doesn't cover the whole question, but I felt it worth pointing out an existing gap/unsupported pattern with user mode. Chris and Daniel mentioned a "user mode with perm set" concept to plug this gap, though I've got some reservations around use of an admin modifiable perm set to cover fields/objects the user doesn't have access to. We have a lot of different queries of a lot of different objects for a lot of different use cases and adding perm sets for each would not make sense. Having a single extra perm set also doesn't make sense... it's a quandary
|
|
| Mar 21, 2023 at 12:31 | comment | added | Robert Sösemann | And as always @PhilW your comment is already good as real answer. | |
| Mar 21, 2023 at 12:30 | comment | added | Robert Sösemann | @PhilW the watchdog ;-) Your critisicm towards the last point is fair. I removed it. I must reject the opinion-based. This is THE best forum in Salesforce. Tell me where to else reach and store the most wisdom. Everything in the end is opinion based. Unless this is a Math solver. ;-) Please leave it open. | |
| Mar 21, 2023 at 12:28 | history | edited | Robert Sösemann | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 104 characters in body
|
| Mar 21, 2023 at 12:26 | comment | added | Phil W | That said.... In our package we often find we need to query records with certain essential fields but then with optional additional fields. Omitting the additional fields from the results is fine, but omitting the essential fields is not. Another way: the query should fail if essential fields are not accessible, but should succeed and simply omit optional details. Until this is supported we cannot use user mode directly. | |
| Mar 21, 2023 at 12:25 | comment | added | Phil W | This is, IMHO, an opinion based question and would be better addressed on the Salesforce forums. Take a look at How to Ask for more. | |
| Mar 21, 2023 at 12:24 | history | edited | Robert Sösemann | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 157 characters in body
|
| Mar 21, 2023 at 10:57 | history | asked | Robert Sösemann | CC BY-SA 4.0 |