57 results found

1. Support relocating components across fields without recreating them

   We need the ability to move an existing component from one content field to another (e.g. from one column to a different column that allows the same component types), not just duplicate it in place. Currently there's no way to relocate a component across fields — the only option is to delete it and fully recreate it from scratch in the destination, re-entering text, re-uploading/re-linking images, and reconfiguring settings each time. This makes routine page reorganization slow and error-prone, especially for content-heavy components like Rich Text blocks or Link Columns.

   •  

   10 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   New  ·  2 comments  ·  Editing Content and Visual Builder  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

2. Option to do a shallow copy when duplicating (copy/paste) a page

   Currently when copying a page all nested items have copies created as well, including: 1) child pages but also any 2) shared blocks within the page content. I would like options to skip the "deep copy" that happens for child pages and shared blocks whenever a copy/paste is done. The shared blocks is especially a problem. Since copying a page creates separate duplicates of the shared blocks, it requires manual work to go in and delete the duplicated shared blocks and re-insert the reference to the original. This feels pretty antithetical to the point of shared blocks: keeping a single instance across many pages to make changes at scale easier.

   Choosing to skip copying child pages would be a nice extra, but especially being able to leave the references of shared blocks as is instead of duplicating them would be a really big improvement to our workflow.

   Currently when copying a page all nested items have copies created as well, including: 1) child pages but also any 2) shared blocks within the page content. I would like options to skip the "deep copy" that happens for child pages and shared blocks whenever a copy/paste is done. The shared blocks is especially a problem. Since copying a page creates separate duplicates of the shared blocks, it requires manual work to go in and delete the duplicated shared blocks and re-insert the reference to the original. This feels pretty antithetical to the point of shared blocks: keeping a single… more

   10 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   New  ·  2 comments  ·  Editing Content and Visual Builder  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

3. REST API support needed for Default Values to get/set default values for Content Types fields

   Currently ContentType REST API does not support get/set for ContentType fields.

   For example: I have a content type with a TextField, have set default value for it in the CMS. However, there is no way to get/set it via REST API, which makes it impossible to deploy the contenttype with default values to other environments using the CLI

   11 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   New  ·  2 comments  ·  Content Manager  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

4. "Seed ID" for building the content URL should be exposed

   We are currently migrating a large amount of content from another platform into the SaaS CMS. We are building an automated tool for this that uses the REST API. After the tool runs we are aiming for a "Run Report" that displays the link to the content in the previous platform and the Optimizely CMS for comparison. In order to build the link in Optimizely URL we need, what I will call for this request, the "seed id".
   For example: https://app-<tenant>.cms.optimizely.com/ui/cms#context=epi.cms.contentdata:///<seed_id>
   Since this is saved somewhere, it would be helpful if this was exposed when you make a request for that content via the REST API. Even better, would be if it was also returned when you submit the POST request to create the content. (It would be helpful if the response to this request also included the content id)

   We are currently migrating a large amount of content from another platform into the SaaS CMS. We are building an automated tool for this that uses the REST API. After the tool runs we are aiming for a "Run Report" that displays the link to the content in the previous platform and the Optimizely CMS for comparison. In order to build the link in Optimizely URL we need, what I will call for this request, the "seed id".
   For example: https://app-<tenant>.cms.optimizely.com/ui/cms#context=epi.cms.contentdata:///<seed_id>
   Since this is saved somewhere, it would be helpful if this was exposed when you make a request… more

   9 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   New  ·  1 comment  ·  Integration APIs  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

5. Add Find/Replace Feature

   Create a feature to allow find/replace functionality so I can easily find words and phrases and, if necessary, replace them with a new word or phrase. This is standard in many CMS.

   5 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   New  ·  2 comments  ·  Editing Content and Visual Builder  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

6. Retrieve references/usages of local (inline) blocks

   For shared blocks and other content types, we can already query Optimizely Graph to find every instance of a given type. For example:

   query FindByType {
   _Content(where: { _metadata: { types: { in: ["<ContentTypeName>"] } } }) {
   total
   items {
   _metadata { key displayName types url { default } }
   }
   }
   }

   This works because shared blocks are standalone content items with their own key/ContentLink, so they're indexed and queryable like any other content type.

   Local (inline) blocks don't support this. Since they're stored as embedded property data on the parent content item rather than as standalone content items with their own identity, the same _Content query (or any equivalent Content Management API call) can't return them — there's no way to enumerate all pages/content items that contain a given inline block type or instance.

   Why it matters: Without this, tracking usage of local blocks for impact analysis (e.g., "what breaks if I change this block's schema"), content audits, or migration/cleanup work requires manual searching or custom indexing outside the API — something that's already solved for shared content.

   Ask: Extend Optimizely Graph / the Content Management API so inline block types and instances can be queried the same way shared block types are — e.g., returning the parent content items that contain a given inline block type, with enough metadata (parent key, property name, URL) to locate each usage.

   For shared blocks and other content types, we can already query Optimizely Graph to find every instance of a given type. For example:

   query FindByType {
   _Content(where: { _metadata: { types: { in: ["<ContentTypeName>"] } } }) {
   total
   items {
   _metadata { key displayName types url { default } }
   }
   }
   }

   This works because shared blocks are standalone content items with their own key/ContentLink, so they're indexed and queryable like any other content type.

   Local (inline) blocks don't support this. Since they're stored as embedded property data on the parent content item rather than as standalone content… more

   6 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   New  ·  0 comments  ·  Graph  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

7. Inline blocks should honor the "unique value per language" (shared property) setting

   Inline blocks should honor the "unique value per language" (shared property) setting

   Properties on inline blocks are always stored per language version, regardless of how the property is configured on the content type. A property marked as not unique per language — i.e. intended to be shared across all languages — behaves as language-specific when the block is inline, so editors get divergent values in each language with no warning.

   Reproduction:
   1. Create a content type with two properties: one marked as unique value per language, and one marked as not unique per language (shared).
   2. Create a page with two language versions.
   3. Add a block of that content type inline inside a content area on the page.
   4. In the first language version, set values for both properties.
   5. Switch to the second language version and change the shared property's value.
   6. Return to the first language version and inspect that property.

   The shared property holds a different value in each language version, while the same content type used as a shared block from the block tree respects the setting correctly — the divergence only occurs when the block is inline

   Expected:
   Inline block properties should respect the language-uniqueness configured on the content type. A shared property should resolve to one value across every language version of the owning page.

   Why it matters:
   Shared properties are how editors keep non-translatable data consistent — identifiers, product codes, tracking keys, brand labels, configuration toggles. On multilingual sites, inline blocks silently break that guarantee: values drift as each language is edited, and there's nothing in the UI signaling that the setting doesn't apply here. Teams either avoid inline blocks entirely on multilingual sites — losing their main advantage of not cluttering the block tree — or manually reconcile values across every language.

   Inline blocks should honor the "unique value per language" (shared property) setting

   Properties on inline blocks are always stored per language version, regardless of how the property is configured on the content type. A property marked as not unique per language — i.e. intended to be shared across all languages — behaves as language-specific when the block is inline, so editors get divergent values in each language with no warning.

   Reproduction:
   1. Create a content type with two properties: one marked as unique value per language, and one marked as not unique per language (shared).
   2. Create a page with… more

   6 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   New  ·  0 comments  ·  Editing Content and Visual Builder  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

8. CMS Authoring UI Improvement: Multiselect Choice Field

   We have Multiselect Choice Field with 50+ items. These are rendered in authoring UI as a long list of checkboxes, which takes up a lot of space.

   We would like to see improvements to authoring UI where we show Multiselect Choice fields as a Dropdown CheckedList box. Would be great if we can have search feature in the list, and also Clear All functionality to reset previous selections.

   5 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   New  ·  0 comments  ·  Editing Content and Visual Builder  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

9. Do not pre-apply Files and Images filters in the DAM picker

   When selecting an asset from the DAM inside the CMS, the picker pre-filters to 'Files' and 'Images,' and there is no way to disable these default filters. We would prefer no filters applied by default so authors get an unfiltered view of available assets. Request: make the default picker view unfiltered, or make the default filters configurable.

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   New  ·  1 comment  ·  Media / Asset Management / DAM  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

10. Database Backup and Point-in-Time Restore for CMS SaaS

    Summary

    Customers want the ability to create database backups of their CMS SaaS environments on demand, and to restore an environment to a specific point in time from those backups.

    Problem

    Today, customers have limited control over recovering their SaaS environments after unexpected data changes. Content editors and developers can make mistakes that are difficult to undo: bulk deletions, faulty imports, a bad deployment that corrupts content, or a misconfigured integration overwriting data. When this happens, recovery generally depends on a support request, which adds delay, uncertainty, and risk to the customer's operations. Teams that test migrations, upgrades, or major content changes also have no reliable safety net to fall back on.

    Summary

    Customers want the ability to create database backups of their CMS SaaS environments on demand, and to restore an environment to a specific point in time from those backups.

    Problem

    Today, customers have limited control over recovering their SaaS environments after unexpected data changes. Content editors and developers can make mistakes that are difficult to undo: bulk deletions, faulty imports, a bad deployment that corrupts content, or a misconfigured integration overwriting data. When this happens, recovery generally depends on a support request, which adds delay, uncertainty, and risk to the customer's operations. Teams that test migrations, upgrades, or major… more

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    New  ·  0 comments  ·  Export / Import  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

11. Cannot create custom folder-type instances inside shared blocks from the CMS UI

    In Optimizely SaaS CMS there is no way to create an instance of a custom folder content type (a content type based on the folder / _folder base type) inside a shared block through the CMS UI. The New Folder action creates only the built-in system folder type and offers no picker to choose a custom folder type. Separately, the New Folder action is currently not working at all in this context. As a result, custom folder instances can only be created via the Content Management REST API or Opal.

    Steps to reproduce:

    1. Define a content type based on the folder (_folder) base type and push it to the CMS.
    2. Open a shared block and go to the Assets panel.
    3. Try to create a folder using New Folder.

    Expected: The UI lets you create a folder of the custom folder type (e.g. a type picker), and the New Folder action works.

    Actual: New Folder offers only the built-in system folder type — no way to select a custom folder type — and the New Folder option does not work in this context.

    Impact: Editors can't self-serve folder organisation when custom folder types are involved — every folder creation needs a developer or an API call, which doesn't scale for content teams.

    Request:

    1. Fix the non-functioning New Folder action in the shared-block Assets panel.
    2. Allow creating custom folder-type instances from the UI (a folder-type picker on New Folder), consistent with how other content types are selected.

    In Optimizely SaaS CMS there is no way to create an instance of a custom folder content type (a content type based on the folder / _folder base type) inside a shared block through the CMS UI. The New Folder action creates only the built-in system folder type and offers no picker to choose a custom folder type. Separately, the New Folder action is currently not working at all in this context. As a result, custom folder instances can only be created via the Content Management REST API or Opal.

    Steps to reproduce:

    1. Define a content type based on the… more
    4 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    New  ·  0 comments  ·  Editing Content and Visual Builder  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

12. Allow Component Copying/Cloning/Duplicating

    Currently, copying/cloning is only available at the page level, but admins would benefit from being able to clone/make a copy at the component level, too, within a given page.

    5 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    New  ·  0 comments  ·  Editing Content and Visual Builder  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

13. Allowable Section Types in an Experience Type

    Can we have allowable section types in an Experience Type?

    In a large implementation, we can have several components/blocks enabled as 'Sections' so that they can be directly added to the Experience page.

    The GraphQL query for an Experience becomes very big as we specify more blocks as 'sections' Can we add a feature where a developer can define 'allowable' sections on an experience, so that the graphQL query that is formed contains only a limited allowable types?

    7 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    New  ·  0 comments  ·  Editing Content and Visual Builder  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

14. Visual Builder forms are incomplete when fetched with @optimizely/cms-sdk

    Visual Builder forms are incomplete when fetched with @optimizely/cms-sdk

    In Optimizely SaaS CMS, Visual Builder forms work in the editor, but the content JS SDK (@optimizely/cms-sdk) does not return everything needed to render them on the site.

    When a Form Container is placed on an Experience, the SDK query does not go deep enough to include the fields inside the form (step → row → column → elements). Form Container properties set in CMS — Title, Description, Submit URL — are also missing from the response.

    As a result, forms cannot be implemented with the SDK as-is. We had to patch the SDK locally so the same content query returns the full form.

    Steps to reproduce:

    1. Activate Forms in CMS (SaaS) and create a Form Container with at least one step, row, column, and form elements (e.g. Textbox, Submit).
    2. Set Form Title, Description, and Submit URL on the Form Container.
    3. Add the form to an Experience.
    4. Fetch the Experience with @optimizely/cms-sdk (getContentByPath / standard composition query) and render it.

    Expected: The SDK returns the full form: layout, all form elements, and Form Container properties (Title, Description, Submit URL), so the frontend can render and submit the form with no extra query.

    Actual: Form elements inside columns are missing. Title, Description, and Submit URL are not returned. Only structure metadata (e.g. displayName) is available.

    Impact: Teams using the official content JS SDK cannot ship Visual Builder forms without patching the SDK or writing a custom Graph query. That is not a supported, upgrade-safe path.

    Request:

    1. Make the SDK composition query deep enough for the form structure: experience → form → step → row → column → elements.

    2. Return Form Container properties (Title, Description, Submit URL, confirmation messages) on the form node, the same way other component properties are returned.

    3. Document the supported way to render and submit SaaS Visual Builder forms with @optimizely/cms-sdk.

    Visual Builder forms are incomplete when fetched with @optimizely/cms-sdk

    In Optimizely SaaS CMS, Visual Builder forms work in the editor, but the content JS SDK (@optimizely/cms-sdk) does not return everything needed to render them on the site.

    When a Form Container is placed on an Experience, the SDK query does not go deep enough to include the fields inside the form (step → row → column → elements). Form Container properties set in CMS — Title, Description, Submit URL — are also missing from the response.

    As a result, forms cannot be implemented with the SDK as-is. We had to… more

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    New  ·  0 comments  ·  Forms  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

15. Prevent silent overwrites of concurrent edits with conflict warning and field-level locking

    Concurrent edits to the same page can be silently overwritten (last write wins). Both editors work against a single shared draft, so whoever publishes second overwrites the first with no conflict warning and no merge. The 'currently being edited' notice is dismissable and does not prevent this, there is no field-level locking, and comments are page-level rather than field-level. Request: a conflict warning on save or publish when another user has changed the draft, and/or field-level locking to protect in-progress edits.

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    New  ·  0 comments  ·  Approval & Collaboration  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

16. Filter content by site or partner when selecting content in multi-site instances

    When selecting content (for example using Select Content to reference a program), the picker shows content across ALL sites and partners on the platform with no way to filter to a specific site or partner. This creates governance and usability problems for large multi-site portfolios. Request: allow filtering the content picker by site or partner.

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    New  ·  0 comments  ·  Multi-site / Apps  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

17. Add spell check to the rich text editor

    The rich text editor has no built-in spell check, and it overrides the browser's native spell check so even the browser no longer flags errors. Request: provide built-in spell check in the rich text editor, or at minimum stop suppressing the browser's native spell check so authors can catch typos.

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    New  ·  0 comments  ·  Editing Content and Visual Builder  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

18. TinyMCE editor toolbar configuration

    I'm a software developer. I would like to be able to configure the toolbar of the TinyMCE xhtml editor in Optimizely CMS SaaS so it matches the exact wishes of my client. Currently we only have 3 options: minimal, standard and extended. It would be convenient if we could configure the toolbar ourselves. I'm think of an option to insert code snippets, but also simple thinks like support for H2 to H5 but not H1. Basically, I would like to be able to configure everything that TinyMCE allows to be configured out-of-the-box.

    8 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    New  ·  2 comments  ·  Editing Content and Visual Builder  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

19. Support Content Variations in Export/Import

    We would like support for Content Variations to be included when using the Export/Import feature

    2 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    New  ·  0 comments  ·  Export / Import  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

20. Choose whether to copy child pages, and how many levels, when copying a page

    When a page that has child pages is copied, the CMS always copies the entire subtree. There's no way to copy only the parent. Request: when copying a page, let the author choose to copy the parent only, or the parent plus its children. If children are included, let the author choose how many levels deep to copy. We need both: duplicating a single page as a starting point without its subtree, and cloning a section or template tree to a chosen depth to stand up new sites. Related: "Option to do a shallow copy when duplicating (copy/paste) a page" (51500807), which covers shared blocks.

    When a page that has child pages is copied, the CMS always copies the entire subtree. There's no way to copy only the parent. Request: when copying a page, let the author choose to copy the parent only, or the parent plus its children. If children are included, let the author choose how many levels deep to copy. We need both: duplicating a single page as a starting point without its subtree, and cloning a section or template tree to a chosen depth to stand up new sites. Related: "Option to do a shallow copy when duplicating (copy/paste) a page"… more

    2 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    New  ·  0 comments  ·  Editing Content and Visual Builder  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Nice to have You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating