Skip to Main Content
IBM Sterling

This portal is to open public enhancement requests for IBM Sterling products and services. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (

Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Search existing ideas

Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,

Post your ideas
  1. Post an idea.

  2. Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.

  3. Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.

Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use

Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.

IBM Unified Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM. - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.

Status Not under consideration
Categories Design Studio
Created by Guest
Created on Jan 9, 2018

automapper should also work with same input/output types

It is a common pattern to work twice on a output card, e.g.:
- when the output should also include summarized amounts of several output records that need to be built/calculated first
- when the header should announce how many records will follow

Now when building the mapping for the 2nd iteration of the output card, the automapper comes in handy, because we usually map the results of the first iteration 1:1, except for one or two fields that need the SUM() or COUNT() values. Unfortunately the automapper doesn't work here, since its behavior somehow differs when input and output use the same typetree (please see the linked PMR for details).
DeveloperWorks ID DW_ID85851
Link to original RFE
  • Guest
    Aug 28, 2018

    We are plannignt o re-architect the automapper in a future release