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.
165 results found
-
Display a custom name in Salesforce when deploying from Gearset
When we deploy a change to one of our Salesforce orgs using gearset, the name that is displayed in the "Deployment Status" in Salesforce is an ID. It would be helpful to display the name that we entered in Gearset instead of the ID so that we can easily identify the changes when looking at them in Salesforce
5 votesHi,
We have recently investigated adding this feature again, but unfortunately Salesforce still don’t seem to support being able to display custom names via the Api (or it’s a feature that’s not well documented). There are requests for adding this ability via:
https://success.salesforce.com/ideaView?id=08730000000cJdxAAE
If the situation changes then we’ll certainly revisit this. We’ll keep this post opened for other users to also add their votes but it’s currently out of our hands as to when or if it can be added.
Regards,
The Gearset Team
-
Allowing data deployments in CI jobs
Allowing data deployments in CI jobs. So that configurations in third party apps and B2B Commerce can be deployed as part of CI.
5 votes -
Enforce code coverage limits on CI jobs
Please set it so that we can force a code coverage check on deployments (including CI). I'd like to verify on the lowers before going through to production. Might be able to do this with test cases but should be able to on deployment.
5 votes -
Be able to switch the direction of a comparison/deployment
Sometimes we need to reconcile changes on an object between two orgs, where some of the changes have been made in Org1 and some in Org2. Having set up metadata filters, compared and deployed required changes from Org1 to Org2, it would be nice to be able click a button to switch direction to then deploy required changes from Org2 back to Org1, without having to go through the whole process of setting up a new comparison.
5 votes -
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."
4 votes -
Transfer ownership of an Org Monitoring job
Transfer ownership of an Org Monitoring job:
We are a consulting firm and a project team often changes during the life of a project. Right now if we have an org monitoring job tied to a project and the owner of that job is moved off the project we need to create a new job and perform a manual comparison.
It would be great if instead of all these manual step we could just change the owner of an Org Monitoring job.
4 votes -
CI Job History - Show what CI runs were manual and who triggered the manual run
It's nice that the CI job history shows the source commit link for the auto triggered deployments from Github merges, but for visibility and transparency it would also be good for users to see when a job was triggered from a manual run and what users ran it.
4 votes -
Load Balancer for CI validation
would be nice to have possibility to configure 1 source (git branch), but multiple targets (sandbox), so gearset would have some "load balancer", which would distribute the validations into sandboxes, which are not busy. Its taking too much time from developers to wait for their validations to finish.
4 votes -
The option to auto-populate FLS/permissions for selected fields/objects/classes
I'd need an option to auto-deploy FLS for items i've selected in one click.
Sometimes the amount of changes is huge, and finding and clicking Permissions for selected items one by one is not a deal. For sure, it's possible to select all Permissions in Source org, and let the wizard to deselect Permissions for missing items in target, however that the result does not usually correspond to items that are in package.4 votes -
See Continuous Integration Deployments in the Deployment History tab
List deployments resulting from a CI job on the Deployment History tab along with manual deployments.
We currently deploy metadata using both manual and CI jobs and it would be convenient to see all deployments in the same list (for debugging, reporting, monitoring).
4 votes -
Allow "Rollback" if you have a user within the same org
Rollback currently requires the user who did the deployment to enable "Deployment" user access. Instead, it would be helpful if I could use my own user, within the same org, to do the rollback.
This would be helpful if the individual who did the first deployment is unavailable.
4 votes -
Slack notifications for non-CI deployments
We use slack for monitoring which is great. We'd like to have the ability to setup more slack notifications for non-CI jobs.
Additionally, we'd love to see deployment starting notifications as an option as well, to allow our greater insights into when it's coming.
3 votes -
Give CI/CD Users the option to use a shared webhook or a new one in BitBucket
Gearset recently updated its automated webhook setup for new CI/CD jobs to use a shared webhook. For my team, we have configured each webhook for validation jobs to only run on PR creation/update and deployments to only run on branch pushes. By forcing the new jobs to a single shared job, it causes PR merges to trigger validations alongside the deployment (Which is time-consuming and needless).
Also, as my team has many legacy webhooks for our existing jobs, when we add a new job it seems Gearset randomly assigns it to an existing webhook. For our recent deployment-only job, it…
3 votes -
Disable Pipeline Back-propagation for Static Environments
We would like to have the option to disable the back-propagation in the pipelines for static environments or have more options to control how the back-propagation should behave, like not running the PR validations for these types of Pull Requests.
When new changes reach the master branch, those changes should be pushed to the branch linked to a Salesforce environment. As it is today, the changes are back-propagated through new Pull Requests and because of the pipeline default config, the unit tests need to run which can block the sandboxes for some time depending on the complexity of the release…
3 votes -
Share edit access to a CI job with another user
Currently, only the owner of a CI job is able to edit it. This is a risk, as the owner is not always available to troubleshoot CI issues. It would be helpful to be able to delegate edit access to other team members so that pipelines can be managed collaboratively.
3 votes -
Add option to "run tests if X is present" on CI jobs
At the moment Gearset only offers an "all or nothing" option ("run all tests"), which is safer but completely ruins minor and cosmetic deployments (because it then takes half an hour to deploy even the smallest, inconsequent change like a Layout change) or "apex or nothing" option ("Default") which does allow for minor deployments to go through.. but also anything that's not Apex, which is dangerous because what if I'm deploying other automations like Flows? these changes would go un-tested.
At the very least an option for "run all tests if Apex OR Flow is present" sounds mandatory. But ideally…
3 votes -
Sandbox Deployment With 0 Components
Running a deployment into a Sandbox or Prod that has 0 components is a waste of time and resources.
If a deployment has 0 components in it, either
1. There's a problem because I was expecting greater than zero (so throw an error), or...
2. I want to run tests, and theres a different command for that (I shouldn't be executing a deployment just to run tests).3 votes -
Local Metadata ignored if name collides across an unlocked package namespace
Current Behavior:
During PR validation of an lwc component named "utils", Gearset reports no changes and runs validation against target org with 0 components because there is a Namespaced Unlocked Package in the target that also has an lwc component named "utils". This can be seen in the "Problem Analysis Results" within the Validation Details for the PR.Expected Behavior:
Gearset should not diff my local components against components that are behind a namespace. Even when those namespaced components are in an unlocked package. Perhaps Gearset should treat namespaced unlocked package components more like managed package components.This is related…
3 votes -
Automate creation of a release, which includes several stories
Within pipelines, provide the ability to validate multiple Pull Requests (PRs) in one shot (i.e. release), so that this release could be deployed to production, for example, using Salesforce's Quick Deploy feature. This would be very handy when getting ready for a production release and I need to validate my release the day before. Thus, on the day of the release, I would simply Quick Deploy it.
3 votes -
Copy reviewers to the cloned promotion branch PR in Pipelines (Bitbucket)
When Pipelines creates a promotion branch and copies a PR that was opened in Bitbucket, it does not copy the reviewers. This means reviewers have no way in the Bitbucket UI to filter for PRs that they're assigned to review.
Further, since all the cloned PRs are authored by the Pipeline owner, the lack of reviewers on top of that makes it quite difficult to visually differentiate between the list of open PRs, especially if you're both someone who creates & reviews PRs.
3 votes
- Don't see your idea?