Skip to content

Help us improve Gearset

We love getting feedback from our users on how we can make Gearset even better. Post your ideas for improvements, new features, and bug fixes alike, and vote for others – let us know what’s important to you.

If you need any further support, please contact us at team@gearset.com.

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback

184 results found

  1. Save Problem Analyzer Changes to Deployment Set

    When using the Problem Analyzer to identify and fix issues within deployment sets, it's common to add or remove items to address specific problems. Currently, these changes are not automatically saved, which can lead to recurring issues in subsequent analyses.

    Suggested Enhancement:
    Introduce an option that allows users to save their modifications directly to the existing deployment set or create a copy of the set with these changes. This feature would streamline the problem-solving process and ensure that resolved issues do not reappear in future analyses.

    Benefits:
    Efficiency: Reduce the time spent on re-analyzing and re-fixing recurring issues.
    Consistency: Ensure…

    4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  2. Option to create a CI job only for back propagation

    We created some CI jobs for back propagation of changes from Production to other downstream branches and orgs. But these CI jobs also pick up pull requests(from a different pipeline) for forward propagation.
    So, basically there is no way currently to create a CI job just for back propagation. It will be good to have a toggle in the CI job to mark it for forward or backward propagation

    8 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. Add the ability to set Metadata filters for all Pipeline environments at once

    In order to update the metadata filters in a pipeline, one must individually update each environment's metadata filter from the list of Continuous Integration jobs.

    It would be amazing to be able to set a metadata filter in the pipeline and have it propagate to all environments in the pipeline.

    12 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  4. Quick deploy in pipelines

    It would nice to be able to use the Quick Deploy feature once a release is validated, instead of either hitting deploy or scheduling the deploy and having it validate one again.

    21 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. precision deployment for Record types

    precision deployment for Record types is required. currently when i try to deploy a record type gearset automatically adds all the picklist fields in that object. if we wanted to deploy only record type or only selected picklist fields currently its not possible. hence, precision deployment is needed for deploying record types

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. Add a Button to Retry Validation on Updates

    The new Updates feature is great, but there isn't a "retry" button when there are validation errors to resolve. It's not very intuitive to have to cancel the update and go start over to retry after fixing validation errors. Currently it just shows that the validation failed and the update can be cancelled. It isn't clear what to do after resolving the validation error, and a retry validation button would simplify the process.
    I had an error related to a manual change that needed to be enabled in my sandbox, and I had to cancel the update to get it…

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  7. Automatic sandbox updates option

    The new sandbox updates process is really convenient - you can see all the updates a sandbox needs and apply one or more. However it is still very much a manual process to start it. We have a team of engineers and each one of them has to constantly go and trigger the update process manually whenever an update becomes available.

    It would be really nice if there was a switch for 'Automatic updates' i.e. whenever it is turned on, the updates are applied automatically during off hours.

    Of course if an update fails the engineer would receive an email…

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  8. Job Completion Percentage

    I would like to see more details about the status of a deployment or validation job in the Pipeline. Right now it just says job is running. I would like to see a estimated percentage of component validated/deployed against the total. Also maybe a running time estimate.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  9. Create a queueing system for the new sandbox updates process

    The new sandbox updates process, replacing long lived branches and back propagation in Gearset, is a really nice feature. However, it has limitations. I have found when trying to update multiple sandboxes at once using the updates feature, Gearset can only handle a couple before throwing an error and saying it is too busy and to try again later.

    I have 6 sandboxes in the pipeline all using this feature so I have to start two, wait for them to update and then start the next two and so on.

    If there was a way to set up a queueing…

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  10. Let "member" create team-shared CI jobs OR let owner convert member's CI job to team-shared

    I see currently only team owners are able to create Team-Shared CI jobs. When my offshore team members who have "Member" role need to create a new CI job, their only option is creating a user-owned CI job, thus missing the benefits of Team-Shared CI jobs. All of our org connections are already Team-Shared. And we already have a Team-shared VC connection too. So, it'd have been very helpful if non-owner users with "Member" role could create Team-Shared CI.

    Alternatively, if that's not possible, next best thing would be - if team owners could convert any member owned CI job…

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  11. Grouping developer sandboxes in Pipelines - back-promotion to a group

    Team,
    Currently Gearset Pipelines only offers the option to connect a developer sandbox group to a single downstream environment. While back-promotion to a group isn't available yet

    Could you please enable it ?

    3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  12. Improve visualization of multiple features being simultaneously worked on in a single developer sandbox.

    Currently, one must select (or create) a single feature+branch in the developer sandbox. The pipeline view only shows 1 active feature at a time. It would be nice visually see all of the features an individual developer is working on/assigned to.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  13. Display pipeline webhook errors in Pull Request details

    Scenario:
    - Feature branch created, commits added, Pull Request opened and pushed part-way through the pipeline.
    - Pull Request has merge conflicts on one of the environments. Conflicts are addressed, but (let's say) PR fails validation so it is not promoted.
    - New commit is added to the feature branch.

    This commit will generally fail to propagate into the above mentioned PR branch (triggering a webhook error). It would be GREAT if that error were somehow displayed on the PR details screen.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  14. Precision Deployments for Lightning Web Components

    It is very much required to have Precision Deployment for LWC components as it is common to have multiple developers working on same LWC

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  15. Notifications for the errors in the webhook page on Pipelines page

    Add possible to configure notifications for the errors in the webhook in the Pipeline. Similar to CI Job notification. Ideally post to Slack

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  16. Allow tests to be run in parellel in multi orgs and allow aggregations of results for PR validation and speed up non prod deployments

    We get 100 sandboxes, Can create test orgs org1, org2, org3 where our unit tests are split and run in them so hour long tests just take 1/3 the time? We would like it to be part of our pipelines as of now PR validation to develop takes 40 mins which makes it unustainable.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  17. Automate Jira Status when a Pull Request is created in Pipelines

    Presently, the capability to automatically update the Jira Status of a ticket is limited to transitions occurring between different environments in Pipelines. Enhancing this functionality to include automated updates triggered by the creation of a Pull Request would prove beneficial, eliminating the need for manual intervention when transitioning to stages such as "Code Review."

    5 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  18. New, one-click "Promote" button is very risky

    In Deployment Pipelines when a PR for a CI Job is selected, a new, one-click "Promote" button exists, if the PR passes merge-conflict and validation checks. This new button is very risky in that it begins the promotion process, without recourse, when clicked.

    Perhaps that's the designers intent but for myself at least, the button is too easy to accidentally click out of inattention, distraction or mouse clumsiness and is especially risky in that I cannot recall the action.

    Personally I like the process of clicking the PR checkbox and clicking "Promote", which prevents unintended deployments.

    As an alternative to…

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  19. Ability to remove PR's from a created release

    WHen working with pipelines, when we create a release and we merge PR's to the release so we can then deploy later, it would be nice if we have the option to remove them in case someone change their mind instead of cancell release and srtart over

    7 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  20. Add pipeline support for CPQ

    CPQ deploys to and from Github/Salesforce so it should be a relatively simple issue to include this in the pipeline deployments. You could add a checkbox or just warning to ensure that triggers are manually disabled when that is needed.

    5 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
← Previous 1 3 4 5 9 10
  • Don't see your idea?

Feedback and Knowledge Base