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.
1240 results found
-
Integrate with Salesforce's Setup Audit Trail for Metadata Detection
Many metadata types are referenced in Salesforce's Setup Audit Trail. An alternate way to detect changes to include could be querying Setup Audit Trail with a Start / End Date instead of asking user to select the necessary components.
1 vote -
Create a Combined view of Monitoring and Pipeline with Alerts
Monitoring is great, but doesn't have a correlation to Gearset deployments (direct or Pipeline).
A view of all changes to org and call-outs of which were Gearset-driven and which were manual would allow us to use Gearset more directly in SOX audits as proof of controls.
Giving us actionable items, whether its in Gearset UI or Source Control to document review and approval of manual changes would be a huge win.
1 vote -
Improve Deployment Information in Notifications
I've tried both Email and Teams integrations and the actual information in the message (or attached PDF for Email) is lacking, with only great piece being the branch name.
An option to get advanced details that could provide some of the below (but not limited to):
- Actual Links - Atleast with Gitlab Self-Managed, we just get a text-based message referencing a merge request.
- Commits / Original MR - For those deployed via a Pipeline, getting the original MR (our pipeline is dev org > QA > UAT > Staging > Production, with the Dev Org > QA being…1 vote -
Remove Site.com from the Default Experience Cloud Comparison filter
The Default Experience Cloud Comparison filter include the Site.com component. This component seems to cause problems with Experience Bundle deployments. I recommend this should be removed from the Default filter.
1 vote -
Add setting to skip Salesforce validation for Aura/LWC only changes
Since Salesforce tests don't cover LWC/Aura components anyhow, if the changes are all Aura/LWC the validation should be skipped.
1 vote -
Better Automated Pipeline MRs
The MRs that get opened for pushing the same work through pipeline aren't very helpful. Would love to link back to the original MR which would have more of the "approvals". Right now we end up having to re-approve everything like its from scratch. Insight and auditability (maybe even bringing up who approved the original MR/etc would be great)
1 vote -
Better Multi-Org Support
We have 3 separate Production orgs for our company. It would be ideal if when we logged into Gearset we had a toggle to choose which production org and then all views, pipelines, connected orgs, etc. were filtered.
1 vote -
Support Gitlab Application Tokens for CI Jobs
Gearset uses User-level Application Tokens which is great for all user-initiated requests. However, things like automated commits, new branches, etc would be ideal if we could tie to Gearset. Gitlab supports granting out tokens at the Group or Repo-level where we could provide a better and more auditable tracking of Gearset automations
1 vote -
Automated Commit Message Identifiers
It would be great if automated commits/PRs/etc had a note that called out they were automated for audit purposes.
1 vote -
ORG Deployment notification
Set notification distribution at Org level besides users profile level.
People are interested on deployments to Production for example. But not everyone is as interested if a user deployed to another sandbox.1 vote -
Display Friendly Org name in deployment - validated and history
Allow to define columns displayed in deployment. I'd like to see Org Friendly name instead of username. We defined these org friendly names when the connection was defined. I'd like to see it as a column with the Deployment dashboards. Most often we care more of the friendly name than the username used to connect.
1 vote -
Provide a list of Frequently Used Metadata Types for easy filtering
I often don't know which metadata types I need to include in a comparison so I don't miss anything so I often use Compare All (takes forever!). I'd like to have Gearset suggest filters based on past deployments so I can confidently compare without having to wait a long time.
1 vote -
Show file storage backup progression
When having large SF orgs with large file storage amount, is impossible to see the progression on the backup. You can only see the object that's being processed. For our org we've seen "Attachments" object under backup for more than 1 month without any idea on where we were.
It would be really helpful to have information on the progression of each backup object (either data or file storage).
Showing the information like: "Backing up file storage in 'Attachments' (1/12). Retrieving record XX of a total of XXX records from Salesforce". Already backed up XX GB in file storage.1 vote -
Update the layout comparison view of Page layouts to reflect custom button/button changes on related lists. Currently XML view only
The layout view does not show custom buttons added to related list/other button changes. This is visible in XML view, the layout view is slightly confusing as a result - The "Select all" tick at the top is present, but no other tick boxes, making it unclear what you are selecting unless you use XML view
1 vote -
Date to date filter
A date to date filter so as to ignore anything outside of that time window. Even if it could just be all the changes for one year, that would help.
1 vote -
Allow different source control users per CI job
At the moment, my GitHub user is defined at an account level. So that user is the one for all CI jobs.
I may want to have a different GitHub user for each of the projects that I run through Gearset. For example, if we are a consultancy that generally use our own stack, but have to use a GitHub user belonging to a customer on some occasions.
Or (as I do now) I may want to switch my GitHub user from one to another. Today, switching that user will disable ALL OF THE CI JOBS. And I will have…
1 vote -
package missing -meta.xml endings
When I download a package from a CI Job, it doesn't include the require "-meta.xml" ending for my metadata types. I wrote the following script to add them back one folder at a time. It would make more sense if Gearset just gave me the correct filenames when I download the package though.
…# Gearset gives us a downloadable package to trouble shoot, # but it doesn't have the -meta.xml text appended to it. # Find all files with this ending and append -meta.xml to it. find ./ -type f -name '*.flow' | xargs -I '{}' mv '{}' '{}'-meta.xml find1 vote -
Ability to delete app visibility
As per the official reply from Gearset support
".....The issue is, if you manually delete the app, all the app visibilities will be deleted as well. But when using Gearset to delete the app visibilities, they are not completely deleted but set to false. The best workaround for this is to manually delete the xml from your git branch. ..."
If Gearset can incorporate this feature, it would be nice.
The workaround is not that hard as it may sound. 4 apps in 60 profiles takes about 10 mins to mass-find and mass-replace in VS Code.
1 vote -
Backup data search feature should allow wildcards
Current the backup/restore search feature is an exact match search only. It would be great to use wild cards or to select "contains" "starts with" "ends with" or simply allow the user to use % to achieve the same.
For example if I wanted to search for the account Willy Wonky Chocolate Factory, with the exact match I have to know the exact name, but with wild card I could search for %Chocolate% and get all accounts backed up with Chocolate in their name.
1 vote -
When merging a Pull Request that is linked to an Azure DevOps work item, indicate the user who performed the merge
Currently, when a PR is merged into an Org (and the PR is linked to an Azure DevOps item), a discussion comment is added to the DevOps item documenting the merge. However, there is no indication in the comment to document the user who performed the merge. The Author of the comment appears to be the owner of the pipeline, not the user who performed the merge. My suggestion is to either make the author of the comment the person who performed the merge, OR in the content of the comments, add a line to indicate "Merged By: [Name of…
1 vote
- Don't see your idea?