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.
1355 results found
-
Dependency-Aware Deployment Sequencing in Gearset
Currently, deployments in Gearset can fail when interdependent metadata components are deployed simultaneously without respecting their dependencies. For example, deploying a new Lightning page that references a report or dashboard will fail if both are included in the same deployment, as the referenced report or dashboard does not yet exist in the target org.
While the current workaround is to manually split deployments into separate feature branches based on dependencies, a more intuitive approach would be for Gearset to detect these dependencies automatically when multiple related components are included in a deployment. The tool could then offer options to handle…
3 votes -
It would be great to have a centralized way to view all components and static code analysis results for every commit within a branch.
It would be great to have a centralized view for all components and static code analysis results across every commit within a feature branch. For example, if a developer makes five commits to the same branch, it would be much more efficient to review the components and static code analysis results for the entire branch in one place, rather than checking each commit individually through the deployment history. Additionally, there should be an export option to easily share the results with developers. Thanks
3 votes -
Clickable Jira Request within Pipeline Promotion History
I would like the ability within the pipeline promotion history to make the Jira tickets clickable. That way a user could simply click the ticket reference to navigate directly to the request.
3 votes -
Add Salesforce Data Cloud sandboxes as an option for deployments
Salesforce Data Cloud sandboxes are now generally available but to promote changes from sandbox to production, the only options are through Data Kit and change sets, CLI, or DevOps Center. Having the option to use GearSet would be helpful so all deployments were managed the same.
3 votes -
Allow Adjusted Column Sizes to Persist in the Comparison Table
Have adjusted column sizes persist once they've been adjusted in the comparison table instead of resetting with each selection. Deploying changes to permission sets could be dramatically streamlined if it's possible to maintain resized columns. If column sizes were set to accommodate the name instead of giving them all the same size, that would also be a huge improvement. The other columns don't include as much info as the name column so it's a waste to give them so much space. It is also inconvenient to caret down in permission sets especially when looking for multiple fields in one permission…
3 votes -
Assigning a dev sandbox to a member should give them deployment access
Assigning a dev sandbox to a member should give them deployment access automatically, or at the very least I should be able to give deployment access in the same interface.
3 votes -
enable using a Repository Access Token instead of a Service Account
I would like to be able to use a repository access token instead of a service account to connect to VC (Bitbucket in my case). https://support.atlassian.com/bitbucket-cloud/docs/repository-access-tokens/
The main benefit for me would be the ability to conveniently authenticate while maintaining a high level of security, even in situations where corporate change management policies and SSO requirements can be cumbersome.
3 votes -
Allow configurable default settings for Jira integration
Allow us to customize the default behavior for the Gearset<>Jira integration. Currently, Gearset posts a comment on the linked Jira ticket every time a commit is started and completed. This creates a lot of noise on the ticket.
Currently the only way to customize the messages posted to Jira are on a ticket-by-ticket basis. Allowing an option to customize this at the org/pipeline level (e.g. only post a comment when a deployment succeeds) would be very helpful.
3 votes -
Compare Types on Comparison
For the pipelines observed when creating a feature branch and during comparison runs, a default filter is applied to the compared types without any metadata types selected (0). We would like to have a custom filter with metadata types for a specific pipeline pre-selected by default when the feature branch initiates the comparison.
3 votes -
allow automatic publishing of an experience site after deployment
Just like you can automatically activate Flows in Gearset upon deployment; it would be nice to automatically publish deployments of Experience Bundles. This is especailly true for deploying Experience Bundles to staging/qa orgs but applies also to PROD.
There's an API to do this: /connect/communities/communityId/publish documented https://developer.salesforce.com/docs/atlas.en-us.chatterapi.meta/chatterapi/connect_resources_communities_publish.htm
3 votes -
In a data deploy, allow filtering data by previously deployed parent objects.
For example, instead of "Only deploy Opportunity records that are children of the Account.Opportunities records that are being deployed" which filters opportunities by the accounts in the same deploy. You would have two deploys. The first would deploy accounts. The second would filter opportunities by those accounts already in the target org.
This would allow you to modularize deploys. You might want to mix and match subsets of data for specific projects. It would allow working around some of the shortcomings of the account hierarchy gearset magic. If there were transient errors (like exclusive locks) you could repeat a smaller…
3 votes -
Increase API call limits
There currently is a API limit of only 10 calls per hour for the reporting and audit API's. This makes it difficult when developing and testing applications that tie into the api. In our case we use the api to pipe the data into our observability platform for reporting and dashboarding. It would be nice to either increase to something not THAT low or to have a development override option of some sort that customers to request to temporary increase. I understand the need for some limits due to having a shared cloud platform but this seems to be on…
3 votes -
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 yetCould you please enable it ?
3 votes -
Improve audit API to extract list of users and their entitlements. Additionally, allowing us to provision & deprovision user access via API
We use 3rd party tools to audit all of our user access at our company. Automating this via API instead of exporting CSV and loading that into another tool would be very beneficial. Additionally, we use that tool for provisioning and deprovisioning so if an API for that existed too, we could automate Gearset users.
3 votes -
Bulk resolving merge conflicts across multiple PRs (set resolution as Feature or Environment)
It would be great if there was the capability to bulk-apply Feature or Environment when resolving merge conflicts across multiple PRs. I have a few dozens that all need to be set to the same option, and it would be useful to handle this quickly rather than click on each one individually.
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 -
Attach specific Tests to Feature Branch Manually
I would like to have the ability to force a features jobs to run specific test(s) from the CI screen.
So if GS fails to detect a test class (either by error or b/c its not named in the expected convention) OR would have failed to catch breaking changes elsewhere, we can avoid/prevent this attaching a set of test classes to that feature branches deployment configuration in GS.
3 votes -
Pipeline Sync Environment & Dev Environment
Currently we only have the ability to sync static pipeline environments. This is well and good but unfortunately syncing the Project branch can be time consuming and confusing Its not as simple as syncing the static environment.
I suggest when I sync the static environment , the sync action automatically opens a back propagation PR to the Dev environment its connected to. Also this sync action should close any pending open PRs against that dev environment that overlap with the sync PR.
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 -
Ability to export deployed components for specified period of time
Instead of viewing it by deployment package, it would greatly help us to be able to export all components deployed during a specific period of time. It would help to include the following:
Deployment friendly name
Source
Target
Date and Time
Deployment Status
Owner
Metadata Type
Name
Difference Type3 votes
- Don't see your idea?