mirror of
https://github.com/microsoft/BCQuality.git
synced 2026-08-06 17:36:53 +01:00
186d8a1314
* Complete AL review knowledge readiness Fill telemetry and Query coverage, strengthen thin review domains, correct audited content defects, and add deterministic cheap-model evaluation and reference-integrity safeguards. Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27 * Generalize review fixture discovery Derive smoke cases from the leaf, domain, and paired-sample conventions so new leaves require no scoring-contract changes. Keep only exceptional selection/context overrides and fail when retrieval metadata cannot rank the selected article. Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27 * Preserve published field IDs in sample Keep the existing Email and Contact Email field IDs unchanged, clarify that the sample represents an independent baseline, and use a local breaking-change rule for the generic smoke evaluation. Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27 * Clarify published field identity rules State explicitly that a published field keeps its ID, name, and type while a replacement is added as a separate field under an unused ID. Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27 * Align field obsoletion sample baselines Use Email field ID 3 as the shared baseline so the bad example demonstrates a same-ID rename while the good example retains the original field and adds a separate replacement. Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27 --------- Co-authored-by: Jesper Schulz-Wedde <jesper.schulzwedde@microsoft.com>
26 lines
1.5 KiB
Markdown
26 lines
1.5 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
bc-version: [all]
|
|
domain: appsource
|
|
keywords: [permission-set, super, appsource, setup, usage, tabledata, execute, submission]
|
|
technologies: [al]
|
|
countries: [w1]
|
|
application-area: [all]
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# AppSource permission sets must cover setup and usage without SUPER
|
|
|
|
## Description
|
|
|
|
An AppSource app must provide permission sets that let assigned users complete the app's setup and normal usage without `SUPER`. The requirement is about complete effective grants, not about naming the permission set after the app. A package can compile and install with missing tabledata or execute permissions, then fail only when Marketplace validation or a real non-SUPER user reaches the omitted path.
|
|
|
|
## Best Practice
|
|
|
|
Trace every setup page, normal page, report, codeunit, and tabledata operation exposed by the app and cover it through assignable role permission sets composed from focused non-assignable sets. Validate setup and representative workflows as a user assigned only those app roles. Grant the minimum required operations; completeness is not a reason to use wildcards.
|
|
|
|
See sample: `permission-sets-cover-setup-and-usage-without-super.good.al`.
|
|
|
|
## Anti Pattern
|
|
|
|
Shipping no permission set, omitting a tabledata or execute grant used by the app's own UI, or instructing users and validators to assign `SUPER` when setup fails. Do not flag a permission-set name that differs from the app name; no such naming requirement exists.
|
|
|
|
See sample: `permission-sets-cover-setup-and-usage-without-super.bad.al`.
|