Dataverse Long Term Retention

Users are currently unable to open records by double-clicking on rows containing long-term retained data in the grid. While we understand that retained data becomes read-only, users should still be able to access and view complete records without edit permissions. This limitation is making it difficult for users to review important information stored in retained data.

We recently encountered a case where a customer noticed that certain Customer Copilot features had been re-enabled in their Dynamics 365 environment—without any prior notification or indication of who made the change. Upon investigation, we discovered that D365 currently lacks audit logging or tracking capabilities for these types of configuration changes.

While it’s possible that system updates or automated processes may re-enable features, customers need full transparency and traceability for all changes—especially those that could impact data access, user experience, or compliance.

Problem

There is no built-in mechanism to:

• Identify who enabled or modified a feature (user, service principal, or system process)
• Determine when the change occurred
• Understand what was changed and the before/after values

Suggested Solution

Introduce comprehensive audit logging for all feature enablement and configuration changes in Dynamics 365. This should include:

• Who made the change (user/service principal/system)
• When the change occurred
• What feature or setting was modified
• Previous and new values of the setting

Additionally:

• Make this audit data accessible via Advanced Find, Power Platform Admin Center, or Audit History
• Optionally, allow customers to configure notifications for changes to sensitive or critical feature flags

As per the current policy, developer environments are automatically deleted after 30 days of inactivity. Given the impact this can have on customers, we kindly request that the inactivity period be extended to 60 days or more. This would allow customers sufficient time to review their environments and make any necessary updates.

Additionally, we’ve observed scenarios where customers have not configured Exchange Online within their environments. As a result, they do not receive email notifications regarding the automated cleanup process. To address this, could we explore the possibility of implementing warning messages within the Power Platform environment These alerts could inform users about the upcoming deletion and provide clear guidance on the steps needed to prevent it.

I would like to propose a new feature for the Power Platform Admin Center that enables administrative users to export a comprehensive list of users within a selected environment, along with their:

• Security roles
• Associated licenses
• Environment access
• Other relevant user metadata (e.g., business unit, access mode, etc.)

This feature should include a customizable view, allowing administrators to:

• Select which columns they want to include (e.g., email, roles, license type, etc.)
• Apply filters to narrow down specific user groups
• Export the data into formats like CSV or Excel for audit or reporting purposes

Why this matters:

Today, gathering this type of information involves switching between multiple tools (Admin Center, Dynamics 365 settings, Azure AD, etc.), and often requires technical knowledge or custom scripts. Providing this functionality in a centralized, user-friendly interface would:

• Streamline administrative and audit tasks
• Improve security and compliance visibility
• Save time for administrators and IT teams
• Enhance governance, especially in large or multi-environment tenants

Suggested Features:

• Environment picker to scope the export
• Role-based filtering (e.g., show only users with “System Admin” role)
• Ability to sort and group by user attributes
• Export button with format options
• Scheduled export or API access (optional but very valuable for automation)

If you agree this feature would be helpful, please upvote and comment to show support!

We are using Form Component Control to show a sub-form on the main form. The main form contains a lot of fields, and the sub-form is placed at the end of the main form. We have some mandatory fields on the sub-form, and if the screen is too small, then the mandatory fields validation is skipped on save, thus letting the user save the record without having all the mandatory fields filled in. We noticed that if you scroll the main form a little bit, then the sub-form loads and all the mandatory fields work as expected.

As I understood, this is expected, because the validation is done on the client side and only the visible part is rendered, but I don't think that this is a good design, considering that we can have mandatory fields in the sub-form.

Proposal:

Either don't let makers have mandatory fields in the sub form or make a toggle to forcefully render the sub-form in the UI, so it is properly validated.

When using certain fuzzy searches in the dataverse we can see a certain result match whilst filling in the searchfield (1 match) but when we press enter, this specific result isnt in the "top results page" as the word searched contains characters such as .- (without spaces, 1 long combination).

The result will only be available if we click on the specific entity page.

Idea would be to highlight multiple columns in setup which are seen as the most relevant ones to be displayed on the "top results" page, and therefor improving the general quality of top results

Give Provision to delete Audit records with Event Type Audit Log Deletion and also give the provision to delete specific entity records with Timeframe as this will help to retain only specific records with specific timeframe.

The largest table by far in our system is ProjTransPosting. We've been told it would fall under a project operations LTR scenario if it were to be included in the future. Please consider adding this new scenario.

The user can use the "Group by" feature in Power Apps Grid Control, which is visible in the App view. However, we would like this functionality to also be available in the Table design view.

This is a simple request: we would like to be able to archive purchase orders and related tables please.