FeedComment not in OST

Issue #50 resolved
Nathen Drees created an issue

I wrote a trigger based on FeedComment and noticed my intellisense wasn't working. Looking in the OST classes, FeedComment isn't there. Looks like it's being ignored for some reason?


Not a huge issue since this is one of those more obscure objects probably.

Comments (7)

  1. Scott Wells repo owner

    Interesting. I'm not doing anything explicitly to filter SObjects. I simply use the Partner API to get the global describe metadata and then get the DescribeSObjectResults for each of those. It sounds like those two objects (and perhaps others?) may not be coming back in the results of those API calls. You might see if other tools that use these APIs have the same omissions to see if it's something in your org (authorization?) or an issue with Illuminated Cloud only.

    I'll leave this issue open for now. Please let me know your findings.

  2. Nathen Drees reporter

    I tried doing a global describe in SF itself using the same user I'm logged in with in IC, and it looks like CollaborationGroup comes back, so I'm pretty sure this isn't a security issue:


    I also checked this through the workbench and I was able to see CollaborationGroup and FeedItem in the list. I'm pretty sure it uses the partner APIs since it can hit any org, so I'm fairly certain this is an issue in IC itself.


  3. Scott Wells repo owner

    Okay, thanks for checking. I've also confirmed that neither of those ends up in my OST. If it's not immediately pressing for you, I'll plan to debug this a little bit over the next few days and see if I can figure out what's going on. I've actually gotten a pretty good start on unit test integration for a 1.1 release and hope to crank on that for a while (in addition to fixing high impact bugs in the current release, of course!) to get that in you guys' hands!

  4. Scott Wells repo owner

    Quick update on this. I found that I had these objects in some of my orgs' OSTs and not in others. It comes down to whether Chatter is enabled in the org. When disabled, these objects aren't present; when enabled, they are. In Workbench, I did have to go under Info>Session Information and click Clear Cache to make sure that I was seeing the real org metadata state before and after.

    Let me know if this isn't also what's happening in your orgs. I'm worried that it may not be given the screenshots you attached, but my hope is that is based on stale metadata. If this doesn't resolve the issue for you, we'll figure out some way to determine why it's happening!

  5. Nathen Drees reporter

    Scott -

    Sorry, I think I sent you on a wild goose chase with this one. When I created the project, I did it by trying to create a project from an existing source and configuring it to match the setup a new project would have. When using this, I noticed a bunch of other strange behavior around the OST as well, not just it missing objects. Eventually I just created a new project totally, and copied our source files back in to the project. The OST is generating fine now, including the 'missing' objects, and intellisense seems to work.

    Not sure what I messed up in the project, but recreating it from scratch and then importing existing sources works better than trying to create a project from existing source.

  6. Scott Wells repo owner

    Ah, okay. Well, I will say this...when generating the OST, I look at locally-available source and omit anything in the org that's already available as local source. That may not explain everything you saw in that other project, but it might explain quite a bit, especially if you selected to bring down things in that project that weren't really "source". One of the recent fixes I implemented was to ensure that I don't even offer to bring down anything from installed managed packages as part of metadata retrieval since those should be represented only in the OST. It's possible I'm still offering to retrieve some things I shouldn't, or perhaps making it too easy to select them.

    Anyway, sounds like I can resolve this one for now. Thanks for following up!

  7. Log in to comment