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.
1140 results found
-
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 -
Ability to test restoring of backup data periodically
It will be nice to have option to automate and test restoring of backup data periodically into a sandbox. Since it is going to be restoring production data to sandbox, there should be options to restore chunk of production data (due to the storage limitation with sandbox) and the metadata.
1 vote -
Provide and enforce branch naming conventions
Branches get all kinds of really stupid names over time. It would be nice if Gearset provided an option to template new branch names. For example when my users need to create a new feature branch for their user story, Gearset should prefix that branch with 'feature/'. When a release branch is created it should be prefixed as 'release/'. Bugfixes or Hotfixes could be bugfix/ or hotfix/.
Dictating naming conventions is unenforcable. Keeping branch names organized goes a long way to keeping the repository maintainable over long periods of time. Even if folks are well intentioned, git branches are case…
1 vote -
Implement Data migration support for nCino
nCino is a native Salesforce application for banking customers, configured using records, similar to how CPQ is configured. Deploying the data based configuration from environment to environment can be very difficult and painful. This would be a valuable feature for every nCino customer
3 votes -
Ability to see complete history related to a ticket or common name
It would be incredibly useful to have the ability to see a complete history related to a ticket or common name. For example, if I'm working on a Jira ticket named "SALES-123," I would like to be able to see all of the comparisons, branches, deployments, and promotions related to that ticket.
This ability would significantly improve the efficiency and effectiveness of troubleshooting issues.
1 vote -
Provide Audit Report of Org Connections and Who Access Has Been Delegated To
It would be great if we could pull an audit report that shows all of our Salesforce connections that are set up in Gearset and who has been delegated what level of access to each of them. This would help us to prove out segregation of duty for auditors by showing who has ever had access to deploy to production.
4 votes -
Ignore changes deployed to orgs from Gearset in Data Monitoring jobs
I would like to be able to monitor changes made to tracked metadata in our Production org, but without the "noise" generated from normal deployment changes (made via Gearset deployments). Basically, I want to catch changes made directly to Production that are unaccounted for in source control.
1 vote -
Ability to assign Data Deployment Entitlement through Shared Connections
We have a central Gearset Owner who setup our various orgs using a dedicated Integration User in each org. They then shared the connections with Gearset Users so the credentials remain hidden.
However, this only delegates metadata deployment entitlement, not data deployment. To allow data deployment, a User needs to remove the shared connection and set up the org connection themselves.
Data Deployment Entitlement should be managed as part of the shared connection, as well as Metadata Deployment Entitlement. This will maintain the ability for central management and also keep org credentials secure.
4 votes -
Bring back the Suggested Fixes in Problem Analyzer to suggest permissions for fields when moving a new field.
Previously if you selected to migrate a field, Problem Analyzer would suggest the permissions. Now it only shows up on Warnings tab. This forces you to go back to the Comparison and individually find the permissions for each field. It should include these as Suggested Fixes. Additionally, if a field is listed as a Suggested Fix, the permissions for that field should be included as Suggested Fixes as well.
3 votes -
1 vote
-
edit problem analyser template
There should be an ability to edit the existing Problem Analyser Template. Else, one has to create the whole template again, re-do the changes on the template and then re-assign on all the existing Jobs which should use that template.
It is definitely going to save a lot of time and be beneficial overall.1 vote -
Allow CI jobs to use the running users GitHub connection
At the moment CI jobs within the Pipeline use the CI owner's GitHub account for new branches and pull requests etc which is stopping the code reviewers process within GitHub from working currently.
Can we allow the integration within Pipelines to run on the promoting user's connection (i.e. so requests are shown with the running user and not CI Owner within GitHub) or allow a generic user to be set up instead to untie deployments from the CI owner GitHub connection within Gearset.
3 votes -
Allow users to select custom fields even if the object does not exist in the target
Would be great if GS allowed to select custom fields when doing a comparison even if the object does not exist in the target. If I am pushing changes to a repository I might want to only include the fields I created/modified and not the whole object.
15 votes -
Show all Github requirements to merge in the Gearset pull request view.
We have required approvals enabled on PRs in Github. Currently when viewing a Pull Request in the Gearset Pipelines view, it does not show that a PR is blocked from being merged because at least one code review approval is needed in Github. This leads to accidentally attempting to "promote" in Gearset and then the Pull Request merge fails. We would like to see these (and any other Github requirements) showing up in Gearset so we are informed which PRs are approved and ready to promote.
10 votes -
Enable a consistent, buildable set of Metadata for Releases
I'd like to have a way to work with a consistent set of metadata items for a release, that I can add, remove etc, and consistently deploy into a variety of sandboxes and ultimately Production.
Currently, if you clone a previous deploy, items are de-selected if they're the same between the environments being compared. That means once I've deployed, I can’t ever get that “list” of items back and I have to rebuild it every time.
A likely scenario is that I've deployed some metadata from Sandbox A -> B. Lets say it's 5 Apex classes. I then realize that…
1 vote -
Gearset Service Status Page
It would be very useful to see a status page for Gearset services. Similar to other service platforms like Github (https://www.githubstatus.com/) or Salesforce trust (trust.salesforce.com)
This would be great to help determine if there are issues with deployments, or if Gearset has any sort of performance degradation.
7 votes -
language
Gearset UI Language specification. Allow users to specify which language they want the UI presented in and then show the correctly translated terms in that language. When using google to translate the UI the words it chooses are not always relevant.
1 vote -
backup expiration
For compliance purposes I'd like to request an option to list the data backup expiration date. We are able to choose how long to retain the backup, but I do not see a place that lists when the backup is set to expire.
4 votes -
Allow Quick Deploy when merging multiple PRs using Pipelines
currently when merging multiple prs using pipelines the merged package validates and then the prs are merged, the resulting deployment then revalidates even though quick deploy is an option, can we use quick deploy when available like was enabled in the ci jobs?
this would save time by avoiding double validation and make the feature more usefull.
2 votes -
Validation job when PRs are raised
Requirement :
Provide option to create a CI Validation Job only with "Validate pull requests targeting the source branch" and keep "Run Job" dropdown as optional .As Of Now :
When we raise a PR, it initiates feature branch validation ( cos, we enabled "Validate pull requests targeting the source branch" ), and after that when we merge feature-branch to target branch, it re-initiates another validation job.
For us, it's like similar validation is running twice on different events from which we can't opt out.Pros :
We can handle when to validate a feature branch, instead of bundling…
1 vote
- Don't see your idea?