2

I found this post (especially Adam Torman's comment) really helpful in getting to the most elusive element of a profile--which record types are assigned to it for creation: Available Record Type by Profiles

However, when I did a "Retrieve" in Workbench with a package.xml with * on CustomObject and * on Profile, I only got the permissions for recordtypes on Custom Objects, not standard objects like Account and Case (where I really need it). I know this sounds obvious because the metadata element literally says "CustomObject", but when I look at my package.xml I pull down in MavensMate, Account and Case ARE listed in there. And there certainly doesn't seem to be a metadata type for StandardObject.

Does anybody know how to pull this down in a similar way? We have thousands of record types and hundreds of profiles (bad I know--this is part of an effort to clean them up). We've written a python script that reads through the XML and compiles it into a nice excel file, but the missing link is all of the record type profile permissions on standard objects, which are of course the most important.

Improve this question
1
  • Here's the package.xml I have been using: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <Package xmlns="soap.sforce.com/2006/04/metadata"> <types> <members>*</members> <name>CustomObject</name> </types> <types> <members>*</members> <name>Profile</name> </types> <version>26.0</version> </Package>
    – Patrick Watkins
    Commented Jun 5, 2016 at 22:29

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4

Standard objects aren't retrieved using the CustomObject wild card syntax. You must specifically reference each standard object you want to retrieve.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<Package xmlns="http://soap.sforce.com/2006/04/metadata">
<types>
    <members>Account</members>
    <name>CustomObject</name>
</types>
<types>
    <members>*</members>
    <name>Profile</name>
</types>
<version>26.0</version>
</Package>
Improve this answer
2
  • Thanks! Apparently you can also mix and match as well. So this gives me account PLUS all the custom objects: <members>Account</members> <members>*</members>
    – Patrick Watkins
    Commented Jun 6, 2016 at 16:44
  • @PatrickWatkins You're exactly right. You can also list custom objects by name instead of grabbing all of them.
    – sfdcfox ♦
    Commented Jun 6, 2016 at 16:48

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .