1244 results found

1. edit other team member's CI job

   Have a way to edit other team member's CI jobs, if appropriate permissions are given.

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   1 comment  ·  Team and account management  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

2. When deploying a custom report type, validate all fields exist in target or are part of the deploy.
   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Problem analysis and deployment failures  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

3. Trigger a data deployment from a CI job

   When we pull down a version between our local and staging environments. We would like to also automatically pull in the testing data from another project.

   As one of the things we are trying to setup is taking a version from Prod then running GhostInspector through our core flows. Ideally every 4 hours we take a backup from metadata + locked down actual data. Then run tests against it.

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Data deployment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

4. Need a Lock to the Custom comparison filters

   We need a lock to the custom comparison filters so that the team will be on the same page and only the deployment manager can be responsible for all the deployments

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   2 comments  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

5. Allow PMD to be configured by uploading a xml file with rules

   We use PMD locally in our IDEs to analyse during development, and the whole team shares a rule file in xml. It excludes the ones we don't like and configures other rules.

   We can configure Gearset to do the same through the UI, but I'd rather be able to just upload the file, then I will know they are the same set of rules.

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   1 comment  ·  Problem analysis and deployment failures  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

6. Show the Created Date and Refresh Date on the Draft Deployments

   I understand the Draft Deployments are snapshots from when they were created or last refreshed. Is that right? Please show these fields on the Draft Deployments page.

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  New feature  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

7. Difference Viewer custom object name: include suffix __c, __x, __mdt, __e, etc

   When you look in the Difference Viewer, it is not clear at all by inspection which line of Metadata Type "Custom Object" is a standard object, custom object, platform event, custom metadata type, historcial trending object, etc.

   For example, Custom object Foo__c displays simply in the Name column as Foo. This is a loss of information in the difference viewer, especially if one has similarly-named custom object metadata types such as:

   Fooc
   Foose
   FooConfig__mdt

   these display as
   Foo
   Foos
   FooConfig

   The full Sobject Name gives the user hints as to perhaps other related components that need to be deployed (perhaps inadvertently omitted by the comparison filters) - such as layouts, permissions, custom metadata type values, etc.

   When you look in the Difference Viewer, it is not clear at all by inspection which line of Metadata Type "Custom Object" is a standard object, custom object, platform event, custom metadata type, historcial trending object, etc.

   For example, Custom object Foo__c displays simply in the Name column as Foo. This is a loss of information in the difference viewer, especially if one has similarly-named custom object metadata types such as:

   Fooc
   Foose
   FooConfig__mdt

   these display as
   Foo
   Foos
   FooConfig

   The full Sobject Name gives the user hints as to perhaps other related components that need to be… more

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   1 comment  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

8. Optimize comparison list view

   The comparison view contains a list view in a scrollable area with an line item for every metadata item in the comparison. Depending on the comparison, this list can be exorbitantly long (10k+ lines). Displaying this many elements on screen is extremely inefficient, and causes browsers to lock up when selecting the "check all" check box (because it results in thousands of incremental manipulations in the DOM). This issue also causes mobile browsers to crash when more than a thousand or so items show in the comparison results.

   There is a common pattern for handling long lists like this, in which a finite number of list items exist in the DOM. These list items are reused as a user scrolls through the list. Once a list item has scrolled far enough out of view, it is moved to the opposite side of the list, and its content dynamically updated to display the appropriate data for that index.

   The comparison view contains a list view in a scrollable area with an line item for every metadata item in the comparison. Depending on the comparison, this list can be exorbitantly long (10k+ lines). Displaying this many elements on screen is extremely inefficient, and causes browsers to lock up when selecting the "check all" check box (because it results in thousands of incremental manipulations in the DOM). This issue also causes mobile browsers to crash when more than a thousand or so items show in the comparison results.

   There is a common pattern for handling long lists like this, in… more

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   1 comment  ·  Bug  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

9. Adjust dependancy on managed package versions for Apex[Class|Page]

   We've found when developing classes against managed packages the class ...meta.xml includes the package version numbers. Problem is these are fixed to the exact version installed (e.g. 9.4, 9.3 etc. example below)

   But then if the managed package is upgraded Salesforce, in its infinite wisdom, doesn't update these so when you come to deploy next time you have to go and manually update all the version numbers - or if you have a different version in another sandbox (to test the newer one) same thing.

   Seems like something a cool deployment tool could handle and offer to fix up on deployment.

   <ApexClass xmlns="http://soap.sforce.com/2006/04/metadata">
   <apiVersion>41.0</apiVersion>
   <packageVersions>
   <majorNumber>9</majorNumber>
   <minorNumber>4</minorNumber>
   <namespace>foo</namespace>
   </packageVersions>
   <status>Active</status>
   </ApexClass>

   We've found when developing classes against managed packages the class ...meta.xml includes the package version numbers. Problem is these are fixed to the exact version installed (e.g. 9.4, 9.3 etc. example below)

   But then if the managed package is upgraded Salesforce, in its infinite wisdom, doesn't update these so when you come to deploy next time you have to go and manually update all the version numbers - or if you have a different version in another sandbox (to test the newer one) same thing.

   Seems like something a cool deployment tool could handle and offer to fix up on… more

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   1 comment  ·  Problem analysis and deployment failures  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

10. Integrate with Checkmarx for static code analysis
    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Integrations and connections (Jira, source control, DX etc.)  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

11. Indicate whether a Validated Package is enabled for Quick Deploy

    T0 - You Validate a package to PROD (run all tests)

    T1 - You or someone else does a deployment of something else, no matter how minor, to PROD.

    T2 - You click Deploy of the Validated Package from T0, all the apex tests are rerun. This is by design per SFDC yet Gearset doesn't tell you in advance that Quick Deploy is not available. Something you think will take a couple of minutes now takes 30 minutes or more. You think you screwed up or Gearset is broken

    Suggestion: On Validated Packages page and on the page of a specific validated package, display a warning that a subsequent PROD deployment has occurred since the package was validated and that Quick Deploy is not available. This will help set expectations.

    T0 - You Validate a package to PROD (run all tests)

    T1 - You or someone else does a deployment of something else, no matter how minor, to PROD.

    T2 - You click Deploy of the Validated Package from T0, all the apex tests are rerun. This is by design per SFDC yet Gearset doesn't tell you in advance that Quick Deploy is not available. Something you think will take a couple of minutes now takes 30 minutes or more. You think you screwed up or Gearset is broken

    Suggestion: On Validated Packages page and on the page of a… more

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  New feature  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

12. When a Picklist Populates, Don't Default to the 1st Value, Default to Blank

    When I choose my destination, the system defaults the picklist to the first item on the list. Instead it should populate the list but don't pick a value.

    For example, when I choose destination = BitBucket, it then takes a moment to load available branches. It takes a little bit so I go on and start to configure the metadata types. Meanwhile, Gearset populates the list and sets the value to the 1st branch on the list, in my case, feature/helpdesk. It should leave the value blank and make me pick.

    This has resulted in me running long-running comparisons, and even deploying to, the wrong organization.

    When I choose my destination, the system defaults the picklist to the first item on the list. Instead it should populate the list but don't pick a value.

    For example, when I choose destination = BitBucket, it then takes a moment to load available branches. It takes a little bit so I go on and start to configure the metadata types. Meanwhile, Gearset populates the list and sets the value to the 1st branch on the list, in my case, feature/helpdesk. It should leave the value blank and make me pick.

    This has resulted in me running long-running comparisons, and… more

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

13. Show # differences found in comparison display

    It would be a nice feature to see the number of differences for each item from the perspective of the source org vs target org.

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

14. Simple visualization showing Process Builder differences

    Assuming the high-vote count Idea for matching on latest version Process Builder flow between source and target (and not by version #) is implemented; make the visual comparison between source/target PB not solely XML.

    Process Builder in XML can't be deciphered by a human mind. Hence, a simple indented text-based visualization could be done to make it more readable

    1. Decision 1.1 Entry criteria 1.2 Immediate actions 1.2.1 action 1 details (XML here OK) 1.2.2 action 2 " " 1.3 Scheduled actions 1.3.1 scheduled action 1 (XML here OK) ...
    2. Next decision ...

    There's an implicit tree layout in the PB visual editor, need something to mimic that in gearset and color code diffs (red/yellow/green)

    Of course, mimic'ing the graphical view in SFDC or something like it would be even better

    If you want a system wherein there is a way to be sure your PB changes aren't smashing the target in an unexpected way; this is essential.

    Doing the same for Visual Flow is harder is the layout is arbitrary so let's start with PB (something more prevalent in orgs than VisualFlow)

    Assuming the high-vote count Idea for matching on latest version Process Builder flow between source and target (and not by version #) is implemented; make the visual comparison between source/target PB not solely XML.

    Process Builder in XML can't be deciphered by a human mind. Hence, a simple indented text-based visualization could be done to make it more readable

    1. Decision 1.1 Entry criteria 1.2 Immediate actions 1.2.1 action 1 details (XML here OK) 1.2.2 action 2 " " 1.3 Scheduled actions 1.3.1 scheduled action 1 (XML here OK) ...
    2. Next decision ...

    There's an implicit tree layout in the PB… more

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Under review  ·  2 comments  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

15. Deployment of pre-valided package doesn't include accurate test counts

    We did a deployment last week and noticed that as part of the deployment report that went out that it stated the Tests Run was zero. We did a pre-validation the day before where we ran all tests with all passing.

    Could this test section on the deployment report again include/include the pre-validation tests that were run for the deployment?

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Bug  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

16. Filter out Custom Field differences based on Field Tracking History

    If the only difference in the field is that History Tracking is turned on, it would be nice to filter these results out.

    Running checks on our app with multiple customers, who all set history tracking differently, can create a lot of noise to filter through to find actual differences.

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

17. Support deleting comparison data

    Having the comparison history is a great feature, but it would be very beneficial to be able to delete any data in the system, especially when working with a trial account. Part of testing could include working with test environments that you don't want to persist after going live. Also, peace of mind when ending the trial that your data has been removed.

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

18. False positives in managed code

    When I enable comparing managed packages (e.g. when I have added a field to a managed custom object), I get lots of false positives saying that there are differences in apex code.

    On the source org, the code is show as "(hidden)"; on the target it is shown as empty. And Gearset lists this as a change.

    Obviously, I know it's not a change, but it adds a lot of clutter to the comparison view.

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Bug  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

19. Compare org monitoring from an arbitrary date to the current state of the org

    In Monitor ORG's tab, we have a daily set of cached metadata that can be used to troubleshoot issues in an ORG. This is great that we have this data. What would be even better (if there is not a way to do it currently), is if we could take the metadata cache from the monitoring job, "x" days ago, and compare it to the current state of an ORG.

    Maybe an ideal way to achieve this would be to select a cached version in the Compare Organizations screen. Alternatively, a button can be added in the Monitoring Job history list (for each row item) to compare cache to current.

    Please share your thoughts.

    Thanks!

    Richard Scott

    In Monitor ORG's tab, we have a daily set of cached metadata that can be used to troubleshoot issues in an ORG. This is great that we have this data. What would be even better (if there is not a way to do it currently), is if we could take the metadata cache from the monitoring job, "x" days ago, and compare it to the current state of an ORG.

    Maybe an ideal way to achieve this would be to select a cached version in the Compare Organizations screen. Alternatively, a button can be added in the Monitoring Job history… more

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Monitoring and reporting  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

20. A count of differences could be grouped by type

    If the count of differences could be grouped by type/color that would be helpful.
    Ex: 20 differences: 5 red, 7 green, 8 yellow. It gives a better sense of how drastic the differences between Source and Target are at first glance.

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close