responsive
361 TopicsSPFx Web Part Not Visible for External User in Client Tenant
Hi everyone, One of our team members has developed an SPFx web part that we have deployed and published in our client's SharePoint tenant using a service account. The web part is working as expected when we access the client tenant using the service account. However, when I access the same client tenant using my external/guest user account, I cannot see or use the SPFx web part. Current setup: The SPFx web part was developed by one of our team members. The solution has been deployed and published in the client's SharePoint tenant using a service account. The service account can see and use the web part successfully. My account has also been added to the client tenant as an external/guest user. However, when I access the same SharePoint site using my external account, the SPFx web part is not visible/available. I would like to understand whether this is expected behavior for SPFx web parts when accessed by external/guest users, or if we are missing some configuration. Could this be related to SharePoint permissions, Entra ID guest-user settings, the App Catalog, API permissions, or the SPFx solution deployment configuration? Are there any specific permissions or tenant-level settings that we should check to allow external users to access the SPFx web part? Is there any Microsoft-side restriction that prevents external/guest users from accessing SPFx web parts? Any guidance on what could be causing this issue and how we can troubleshoot or resolve it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!10Views0likes0CommentsSPMT Needs True Mirror Mode and Resource Throttling
Subject: SPMT Needs True Mirror Mode and Resource Throttling SPMT incremental migration does not behave like a true synchronization or mirror operation. New and modified files are copied, but deleted, renamed, or moved files are not reconciled at the destination, often resulting in orphaned content and duplicates. Microsoft has previously confirmed this as expected behavior. Administrators have had reliable mirror-style functionality available since the circa 1990s through tools such as Robocopy. In comparison, SPMT's incremental migration capability feels incomplete for modern enterprise migration scenarios. Requested enhancements: Optional mirror mode similar to robocopy /MIR Delete destination content that no longer exists in the source Detect and process renames Detect and process moves Pre-migration analysis and dry-run reporting Configurable safeguards for deletions Additionally, SPMT appears to consume storage resources aggressively. During migrations, disk I/O activity can become saturated and disk idle time can fall close to zero regardless of migration batch size. This behavior can negatively impact file servers and production workloads. Requested performance controls: I/O throttling CPU throttling Concurrency controls Bandwidth limits Scheduling and business-hours policies Dynamic backoff based on source-server load Current behavior requires administrators to perform manual cleanup and reconciliation after incremental migrations while also managing significant infrastructure impact during migration runs. A modern migration tool should provide both synchronization intelligence and resource governance controls. Frankly, from an infrastructure perspective, your complaint about the I/O behavior is probably the stronger one. Many migration tools deliberately maximize throughput, but not providing an obvious way to cap I/O, threads, or overall system impact can be problematic in production environments. The lack of mirror semantics combined with aggressive scanning/copy behavior is what tends to frustrate admins the most.188Views0likes0CommentsRecycle Bin and Site Content Hidden for Site Members and Site Visitors
I posted this before but made a mistake with my write up, so I am reposting. I have a requirement that the Recycle bin and Site Contents should be be hidden from the Site Members and Site Visitors. Please how can I achieve this because the Server Infrastructure activation is not working for me. Any workarounds? Please help506Views0likes1CommentRecycle Bin and Site Content Hidden for Site Members and Site Visitors
I have a requirement that the Recycle bin and Site Contents should not be be hidden from the Site Members and Site Visitors. Please how can I achieve this because the Server Infrastructure activation is not working for me. Any workarounds? Please help500Views0likes2CommentsDynamic Mandatory Fields
In a SharePoint library, I have folders which are = a. Admin b. Events c. Furniture and Moves d. Janitorial and Maintenance e. Parking and Transportation f. Shipping and Receiving g. Supplies and Equipment h. Waste and Recycling I have Meta data across the library whose data type are all choices and are: a. Document Type = Contract, Financial, planning b. Building = Gym, Garage, Heating c. Asset Category = Office, Playground d. Fiscal Year = FY23, FY24, FY25, FY26, FY27 e. Vendor = Maple Leaf, Canadian Tire, Home Depot f. Status = Active, Pending, Not Active g. Retention Label = 3 years, 5 years h. Service Type = Admin, Events, Furniture and Moves, Janitorial and Maintenance, Parking and Transportation, Shipping and Receiving, Supplies and Equipment, Waste and Recycling Service Type and Retention Label are mandatory fields, with the Rule below for all the files in the various folders: IF Folder Name = Admin, then Service Type = Admin and Retention Label = 5 years; the mandatory fields should be Document Type, Status and Fiscal Year IF Folder Name = Events, then Service Type = Events and Retention Label = 3 years; the mandatory fields should be Document Type, Status and Fiscal Year, Building and Vendor IF Folder Name = Furniture and Moves, then Service Type = Furniture and Moves and Retention Label = 3 years; the mandatory fields should be Document Type, Status and Building IF Folder Name = Janitorial and Maintenance, then Service Type = Janitorial and Maintenance and Retention Label = 3 years; the mandatory fields should be Document Type, Status and Fiscal Year IF Folder Name = Parking and Transportation, then Service Type = Parking and Transportation and Retention Label = 3 years; the mandatory fields should be Document Type, Status and Fiscal Year IF Folder Name = Shipping and Receiving, then Service Type = Shipping and Receiving and Retention Label = 3 years; the mandatory fields should be Document Type, Status IF Folder Name = Supplies and Equipment, then Service Type = Supplies and Equipment and Retention Label = 3 years; the mandatory fields should be Document Type, Status and Fiscal Year IF Folder Name = Waste and Recycling, then Service Type = Waste and Recycling and Retention Label = 3 years; the mandatory fields should be Document Type, Status and Vendor I have used Column Default Value Settings for SharePoint to display Auto-Display the Service Type and Retention Label, but I cannot seem to perform the conditional mandatory fields using Validations setting for the other requirements. Please help557Views0likes1CommentAdd action buttons per row in the document library / List to minimize clicks
We would like to add action buttons against each item in the SharePoint document library (e.g., Open, Edit, Share, Copy Link) to reduce the number of clicks for end users. This will improve usability, especially for users on different screen resolutions who may have difficulty locating the appropriate commands in the toolbar or context menu.Solved372Views0likes3Commentslive weather forecast on sharepoint site
I would like to display a live weather forecast on sharepoint site that shows the current and next 5 days weather forecast. I have tried weatherwidget.io but the code doesn't seem to be working on SharePoint. Please can anyone advise me on how to proceed. Thanks243Views2likes2CommentsClarification on SharePoint Macro Consent Flow and Permissions
Hi Team, We have a customer using SharePoint in a secure environment. While configuring the Prolaborate SharePoint Macro on their site, a consent popup is displayed during the approval process. Previously, our macro implementation used the Admin Consent flow. Based on the customer’s security and approval requirements, we have modified the consent to use the User Consent flow instead. The customer has requested additional clarification regarding the consent process. Specifically, they would like to understand: The exact API calls triggered for these two consents View your basic profile Maintain access to data you have given it access to The permissions being requested from Microsoft Graph or SharePoint Whether the application requests any tenant-wide or high-privilege permissions Whether minimal permissions such as Sites.Selected can be used instead of broader scopes Current concern: The customer feels the current permission request is too broad for approval within their secure environment (Banking customer). Reason: Their internal approval process requires clear visibility into the exact API and permission scopes being requested, as different permissions are reviewed and approved by different internal teams (for example, User.Read is managed by the Identity team). From our implementation side, we are using only custom APIs and are not directly calling Microsoft Graph APIs. This information will help us provide a clear response to the customer and support their internal approval process.232Views0likes2CommentsModern Employee Directory
Hi Team I’ve built a Modern Employee Directory web part and would really appreciate your feedback and suggestions for new features. It’s an open-source project. Feel free to share your thoughts in the GitHub Discussions section. If anyone is interested in collaborating, you’re more than welcome to join and contribute. https://www.wrvishnu.com/modern-employee-directory-sharepoint/78Views0likes0Comments