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.
1308 results found
-
Allow for cross-object mapping with the data deployment add-on
It would be so powerful to allow users to map data to different objects using the data deployment tool. It would allow us to move data efficiently between orgs that don't have completely aligned object APIs and metadata.
3 votes -
Add ability to clone deployment CI job to validation-only CI job
This would save us time duplicating regex statements for the new job
6 votes -
Option to retry Deployment after failure
Currently, if your deployment fails you have two options:
- Click "back to results"
- Click "new comparison"
Going with option 1 means it needs to re-load the comparison and then click next and re-run all the analyzers again which can take a varying amount of time depending on the size of the comparison/deployment.
In situations where the deployment failed, but the fix is to change something in the org manually - it'd be great to have an option to simply "retry deployment" from the failed deployment screen and skip the various screens and re-loading.
3 votes -
Launch into our Connected Organizations from various screens in Gearset tooling.
Since we have orgs setup in the Monitoring Dashboard or simply in the list of Organizations under My Connections can we get a button that can open that org in a different browser tab ... it would be a super usefuil feature for those of us monitoring many many orgs. its like SFDX ORG : OPEN -u alias name .,..... but having that ability in the GS Tools in relevant areas ... (Monitoring, or My Connections come to mind first.) We have a mixture of DEV, Production and other scratch orgs both internal and External Clients ..... its not always…
1 vote -
Microsoft Active Directory authentication for Gearset
Our company works with Microsoft tools and it would be very useful for us to be able to authenticate with Microsoft Active Directory. That way our security team only has 1 place to manage users for all our tools.
4 votes -
Add a Select All that works on filtered items when setting up filters
When setting up the filters, I would like the ability to do a Select All on just the filtered items so that I don't have to manually select each one of them. This would be a huge time saver.
10 votes -
Metadata Filter organization with group or tag management
It's great that we can set filter visibility now to Only Me or to share with Team. It would be nice, especially for larger teams, to have another way to organize them either with tags, folders, sub teams or groups.
Example: 1 Scrum Team may have 10-15 filters they maintain and use, and another group of users on a team also have 5 or so they use. Both can see all 20, and this adds up fast.
Feels like being able to group users together could also have other benefits like mass assigning access to orgs (for deployment, validation, comparison)…
5 votes -
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.
5 votes -
Friendly name should be surfaced on the deployment summary page.
The Friendly Name should be surfaced on the deployment summary page, either as a row in the "Summary" section or in its own section, similar to Deployment Notes.
We often track deployments by saving links to the deployment summary. But there is not an easy way to grab the friendly name if we want to search the deployment report; for example to combine packages.
4 votes -
Delegate access to a scratch org
The ability to delegate access to a scratch org without extending access to the related production environment would be helpful. We have situations where we need developers to build new ideas in a scratch org but do not want to extend the access to the production environment
1 vote -
Additional options for updating Azure DevOps work items
For example, we do not want to see messages posted for validation started, validation completed, deployment started, deployment completed. We only want to see messages posted on successful deployment. And one more thing is to update the State once the deployment completes successfully.
2 votes -
Add ability to disable all comments on JIRA tickets
Currently, when adding a ticket number in JIRA connector on a deployment, there is no possibility to disable comments sending on JIRA.
This can be a problem, as JIRA tickets can also be seen by our final users, and this "XXX has deployed the ticket" kind of comments can question them.
3 votes -
Provide Salesforce error message for Backup Failed Jobs
For Data Backup Jobs that fail it would be beneficial for the corresponding email to contain the Salesforce error message that caused the error.
Or at the very least provide the error in the user interface of the failed Data Backup Job on Gearset site.
1 vote -
1 vote
-
Create post deployment automations to SF records
Hi Gearset😍
Love your deployment product!We are using salesforce as a ticketing system - any chance you are planning to make a connection to Salesforce records like you did for Jira or Azure?
I would love the have the option to do some things automatically after a deployment, for example:
Attaching the deployment report to the ticket
Updating Status field
Update Environment Field (based on target org name)
Posting a chatter post about the deploymentThanks!
1 vote -
Allow exporting of custom filter settings
I have some regexes configured specifically for continuous integration, changing these would likely break our CI process. I would like to be able to export a JSON or YAML (or whatever sensible text based format) of my filter configuration, so I can easily view which metadata I'm selecting and excluding through regex, and possibly commit this file to source control.
This is primarily because our team shares filters, and I'd hate to lose the configuration because of someone mucking up.
3 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 -
Mass delete of deployment and validation history
Would like the ability to delete multiple history items at once. The current process of clicking delete and then clicking the confirmation is cumbersome and time consuming when we have multiple users and multiple environments kicking off many CI validations through the day. Failure to clean up the Validation history, especially, eventually brings Gearset CI viewing to a crawl. Having the ability to delete multiple at once and/or a the ability to add a retention period for history would be ideal. Validation history is the most important because you can't filter by time period like you can when you go…
4 votes -
Modify files during deployment process
In Salesforce, if you add an image to a PathAssistant, it hard codes the sandbox URL in the metadata. This causes failures when you then try to deploy that item to the next environment. My idea is that a feature is added that would allow some sort of find/replace logic that's applied prior to the CI compare. Something like:
File: Enter the name of the package file
Search Text: The text and/or regex string to search the file for
Replacement Text: The text to replace found the text withIn this way, it would modify the source file prior to…
2 votes -
Clone deployment package from within the CI job history
We have a feature branch we create a PR 1 to SIT -> we merge the branch -> deploys to SIT -> we delete the branch
We have a feature branch we create a PR 2 to SIT -> we merge the branch -> deploys to SIT -> we delete the branch
now both PRs are in SIT branch
we make a PR from SIT to UAT -> Both PR's are validated against UAT -> if all is good both PR's get deployed to UAT
but then Monday comes and business wants JUST PR1 to be deployed to production
so…1 vote
- Don't see your idea?