Help us improve Gearset

Welcome to the Gearset feedback forum. We love getting feedback from our users on how we can make Gearset even better.

Post your ideas and vote for others – let us know what’s important to you. We’re keen to hear about product improvements, new features, and bug fixes alike. We check this forum regularly and will keep ideas updated with their current status. If you need any further support, please contact us at team@gearset.com.

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback
  1. Retain Deployment Friendly Name and Notes After Failed Deployment

    When attempting to validate a deployment, and the validation fails, Gearset retains the deployment's friendly name and notes fields from the validation. The user can make any necessary changes to the deployment, and won't have to re-type this information when attempting it a second or third time.

    I'd like to see this same functionality when dealing with a failed deployment that doesn't use validation. Validating a package takes two steps (long steps), and typically I only want to use this option when delaying a deployment. However I often use it anyway just so I can retain my data in these…

    2 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

    0 comments  ·  Data deployment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  2. Repo cleaner for managed package deletions

    When you delete a managed package from VCS by deleting its <InstalledPackage>, Gearset should look for all traces of that managed package in VCS and delete those files/update the metadata

    The <InstalledPackage> file identifies the namespace - eg. SomePkg, and Gearset should be able to remove files that start SomePkg__ as well as delete/edit metadatablocks within other files that reference SomePkg__c.

    It is extremely tedious to remove managed package metadata from VCS otherwise; especially if the customer opted to put a lot of managed package metadata in VCS (perhaps by accident)

    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

    0 comments  ·  New feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  3. Choose Delete action per Metadata Type for CI jobs

    In the past we had troubles deploying reports via CI, they were not showing/deploying, the workaround was to enable the filter to include all reports. This works to solve that, but now I am looking at including more into the repo and start using delete actions in the CI jobs as well. The downside is that because we have to have all reports in the filter, the CI job will delete reports created by users in non-private folders. A freedom we want to give certain users in Production.

    What would be an epic enhancement (and solve this challenge) is if…

    26 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

    5 comments  ·  Deployment automation  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  4. Allow users to share deployment drafts across different Gearset environment

    Lets say multiple vendors are working on different environments and done the deployment across all the lower environments using their own Gearset. But coming to the production org. internal team will be performing the deployments using internal Gearset. So Instead of recreating the deployment draft again, it would be very useful internal team can reuse the draft created by vendor in different Gearset environment.

    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

    0 comments  ·  New feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  5. Add the concept of Master seeding object

    One great feature to have, would be the possibility to identify a Master object from which the filters applied on it would be applied on all dependent objects automatically.

    2 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

    0 comments  ·  Data deployment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  6. "Dismiss/Hide Item" option for any found comparison

    There are numerous "changes' that aren't actually changes (ex: logo images, Global Picklist set order). It'd be great to hide those those changes or dismiss them in a comparison to not look at them. Once it's dismissed, it's out of sight and there is no need to evaluate it every time you look at a saved comparison. It'd be clear that it was evaluated and not dismissed.

    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

    0 comments  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  7. Allow 'OR' combination for multiple External ID's in Upsert operation

    Gearset allows the selection of multiple External ID's in an Upsert operation as part of a Data Deployment.

    However, the system implements an 'AND' combination across all the external ID's specified on the object.
    Effectively, ALL external ID's need to be present on the target side for the match to be identified and record upserted. If all external ID's are not present, the system performs an Insert on the target org.

    Please allow an 'OR' combination across multiple External ID's. Arguably, this should be the default option, but at the very least, a user needs the ability to decide how…

    2 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

    0 comments  ·  Data deployment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  8. Filter option: not containing, eg. rather than filtering for 'custom field', filter by components not a 'custom field'

    A better example might be I don't want to see anything that has the word 'contact'.

    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

    0 comments  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  9. Ability to differentiate between scheduled metadata deployments from validated packages and non validated packages

    Under Deployment History

    1. All scheduled packages should appear. This is not the case today, validated packages that have been scheduled appear under validated packages with a Scheduled Date but not under Deployment History

    2. Scheduled packages should have a link to the appropriate Validated package if any.

    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

    0 comments  ·  Deployment automation  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  10. Option to ignore: <personAccountDefault> in XML

    When comparing XML for RecordType permissions in Profiles, some Sandboxes return:
    <personAccountDefault>true</personAccountDefault>

    As part of the XML, even though person accounts are not enabled, this makes comparing annoying.

    It would be nice to have an option to ignore this.

    2 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

  11. Warn on Master/Detail deployment even without comparing Custom Fields

    If you compare Custom Fields and try to deploy something in an Object that is in a Master/Detail relationship without including the Lookup field, Gearset will warn you that the deployment will fail.

    However, if you don't include "Custom Fields" in the comparison, (for example just comparing Validations) and try to push it, you will hit an error:

    "Cannot set sharingModel to ControlledByParent on a CustomObject without a MasterDetail relationship field"

    Gearset could easily warn the user on this when trying to push a Validation Rule on a MasterDetail object, even if Custom Field was not added to the comparison.

    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

  12. create a Default Value setting on Source Control & Connections

    Reading the previous suggestions this might be a bug.

    Where a user has multiple connections to Github, Bitbucket etc. It would be good to be able to set a default connection.

    It is suggested that when you go to Compare, the last selection should be displayed. But I am not seeing that happening?

    I would expect the default Source to display, no matter what Compare I and setting.

    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

    0 comments  ·  Bug  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  13. add an account based autonumber field to deployment that could be used as a friendly reference

    This could be automatically prefixed to friendly name of the deployment.

    Sth like "000035"

    Could be a simple counter (that I see you have implemented "This is your NNth deployment...").

    If the autonumber would pop up automatically then I would not need to figure out a reference and type it myself.

    Currently, info that potentially could be used: datetime (too long) , url (way too long)

    2 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

    0 comments  ·  New feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  14. Ability to select source target for Successful Deployment Notifications

    Currently successful deployment notifications send every success to the specified addresses. Having the ability to specify the source would eliminate the unnecessary notifications to those addresses. We have a use case in which we only wish to send notifications for successful deployments to our production source.

    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

    0 comments  ·  New feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  15. Select individual fields in a Data deploy

    Having the option to move up only selected fields in a Data deployment is needed. If we are required to move up all fields in each deployment, there are scenarios where our work will get bottlenecked in a sandbox on the way to production and at that point all the deployments will be identical.

    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

    0 comments  ·  Data deployment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  16. Allow orgs to be grouped in folders

    On the “My Connections” page, I'd love to see an option to add a folder (and sub-folders).

    Currently, there are options for "Developer orgs", "Sandbox orgs", "Production orgs", and "Scratch orgs".

    If you are running more than one entity, having the sandboxes related to a single entity inside of a folder would be more user-friendly than having multiple dev/sandbox orgs inside the same folder.

    For example, if I'm managing deployments for "ABC Company", "XYZ Company", and "LMNOP Company", and each has multiple sandboxes, it would be really convenient to be able to separate out their various sandboxes more effectively, into…

    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

    0 comments  ·  New feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  17. Show data hosting option chosen for an account

    It would be great to see the chosen data hosting option for an account in the 'My Account' area. Without it security audits will not be able to verify what setting was chosen and will have to rely on documentation held elsewhere.

    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

    0 comments  ·  New feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  18. Re-validate a deployment after failure without returning to compare

    Would love the ability to re-validate a deployment after making changes to the target org. I notice this a lot if there's a username issue that needs fixed in the target, I'm able to fix the issue without refreshing the comparison, but still have to return to the compare, go through the automated fixes, and then re-validate the deployment.

    2 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

    0 comments  ·  Data deployment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  19. Add an option to disable Problem Analysis for CI

    When running CI jobs, we can create a problem analysis template to control what potential problems can block a deployment.

    For deployments from SF orgs to Git, many of the problems being analysed are just irrelevant (e.g. users don't exist in the target, because the target is not Salesforce).

    Although some options can be switched off via templates, the list is not comprehensive. So, it would be great to have an option to switch off everything, or a built-in template of "no analysis".

    When production is the source of truth, we just want all the metadata to get copied into…

    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

    0 comments  ·  Deployment automation  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  20. Refresh specific item in comparison through context menu

    It would be great to refresh a specific item within a comparison that I know has changed since the last comparison.

    84 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

  • Don't see your idea?

Feedback and Knowledge Base