Skip to content

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.

If you need any further support, please contact us at team@gearset.com.

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback

223 results found

  1. Prevent Accidental Backing Out of Deployment components when Deploying Multiple Packages

    Sometimes I have multiple packages that have been validated, that I am looking to deploy. If they happen to overlap components, then deploying in the wrong order could back out a change made by the earlier deployment.
    From this I came up with two ideas that could help:

    1) The ability to select multiple validated packages or draft deployments, and click a button that will tell me if they have overlapping components. That will let me know if I have anything to worry about; if they overlap then maybe I should combine them into one package.

    2) The ability to…

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  2. The ability to deploy only certain fields in a record type and not all fields

    If we want to promote a change to a single field in a record type, we're unable to because the file is pushed in it's entirety. We'd like the ability to view from list of available changes in a record type by field and select just the changes to the fields we want to promote.

    3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. Rename the Name bar in compare and deploy to : Name (api)

    Simple to implement, just a string rename...
    Rename the Name bar in compare and deploy to : Name (api)
    It would show clearly that the name displayed there is the API name, not the "label" name XD
    Cheerio

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  4. Enhance Metadata Filter Type Recognition

    Our team has struggled learning the Metadata API names of metadata types when compared to what items are called in change sets. One example would be to highlight Weblink when a user searches for Button.

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. Option to ignore: <personAccountDefault> in XML

    When comparing XML for RecordType permissions in Profiles, some Sandboxes return:
    <personAccountDefault>true</personAccountDefault>

    As part of the XML, even though person accounts are not enabled, this makes comparing annoying.

    It would be nice to have an option to ignore this.

    8 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. Ignore "trackHistory" comparison if an Org has "FALSE" and Git does not define this entry

    The Salesforce CLI system returns the Custom Field Metadata XML file without a "trackHistory" entry if it is set to false. This XML entry is optional in the Custom Field metadata type. However, once we deploy such metadata to the org and execute compare between a branch and the org again, it shows differences, saying that "trackHistory == false". But is "false" by default. So I would recommend you ignore this entry if SF Org returns FALSE and the VCS file does not have this item.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  7. Pop Out Diff File in Comparisons

    The current UI design for comparisons is very unfriendly to smaller screens. When working on a laptop viewing the comparison and the Diff files together is nearly impossible. It would be useful to be able to pop out a diff file or open it in another tab so it can be better viewed.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  8. Make org-org and org-VCS compare differences work the same

    There is no end to confusion on the part of the devops user when Gearset displays differences "differently" when comparison is org-org vs. org-VCS

    For example: https://docs.gearset.com/en/articles/3491009-are-profile-permissions-showing-up-as-new-or-deleted-when-you-know-it-s-not-the-case

    Gearset should apply a consistent principle - to see a Profile subcomponent, the compare filter should include both sides of the subcomponent (e.g. Profile + ApexClass to see ApexClassPermissions; Profile + Layout to see layoutAssignments; etc.)

    If both sides of the subcomponent are not included in the filter, then there's no difference to show.

    Note that these use cases must also be supported:

    Profile deleted in org; org->VCS compare should delete .profile file…

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  9. r.uzdavines@nextech.com

    It would be great if I could group my Selected Items into groups or Projects, so that I could filter and just see those. Now that I've added a bunch of items for different projects, it's a little hard to quickly decipher which project it applies to. I'd like to be able to double check each Project's list right before deploying to make sure I've added everything. Maybe you can add another column and allow the user to create new values for "Projects."

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  10. To add capability to mark (to ignore) not selected items to be able to remember that the particular item is not required to be deployed

    When compare source and target, sometimes u do an educated decision to NOT select something, and then selecting the rest of the items. Then if the compare results saved as a Draft Deployment, u may return back to it, and do a refresh for the comparison. In this case Gearset would kindly save all of the selected items. But for items that were not selected by the user, not they are mixed up with the new differences. So user have to remember, that this particular item he did not select intentinally, but this item that is not selected is a…

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  11. Allow Package Cloning between Saved Comparison Pairs

    Please allow us to select a comparison pair as the source/destination when cloning a package. This will make it much easier to select the source and destination when cloning a package, and reduce the risks associated with accidentally selecting the wrong repo or branch or sandbox.

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  12. "Dismiss/Hide Item" option for any found comparison

    There are numerous "changes' that aren't actually changes (ex: logo images, Global Picklist set order). It'd be great to hide those those changes or dismiss them in a comparison to not look at them. Once it's dismissed, it's out of sight and there is no need to evaluate it every time you look at a saved comparison. It'd be clear that it was evaluated and not dismissed.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  13. Filter option: not containing, eg. rather than filtering for 'custom field', filter by components not a 'custom field'

    A better example might be I don't want to see anything that has the word 'contact'.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  14. Last Modified in Metadata Filter

    It would be great if I could set a "last modified" filter when setting which metadata to pull. Rather than go to Apex Classes, wait for the list to refresh, then cherry-pick them, it would be great to simply compare Apex classes modified today, or in the last 30 days, or in the last hour, etc.

    4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  15. 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.

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  16. Ability to cherry pick changes in a file

    When comparing changes between a source org and a target org for a given file/metadata component, it will be great to have the ability to choose which change(s) should be promoted from the source org to the target org.

    Presently, it's an all-or-nothing scenario i.e. either one deploys all the changes to a given file from source to target or deploys none. As a workaround, we cherry pick changes to a file using VSCode and then deploy to the target org using VSCode –– which is the exception to our "all metadata changes must be deployed through Gearset" policy.

    Adding…

    5 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  17. Ability to choose whether or not to respect the forceignore file

    Would like a checkbox on the comparison screen that allows me to choose whether or not the comparison will respect the contents of the forceignore file. (Similar to the checkbox allowing you to choose whether or not the comparison should use the package.xml file).

    Our usage of Gearset does not align with our usage of the forceignore file for automated deployments. In fact, we often use Gearset to manually compare and/or deploy items that we specifically ignore for automated deployments.

    Summary of problem this new feature has introduced:
    We use gearset for org -> git deployments, and for git ->…

    4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  18. Display Permission Set changes as one entry

    When working with Permission Set changes, it sometimes would be useful to see them grouped by Permission Set instead of being disaggregated by field. For example, we are migrating from using Profiles to Permission sets to grant all access. Currently, if we make changes to many (>100) fields in two different Permission Sets, we have to review many (>100) entries. Also, grouping by permission set would allow us to deploy changes to one Permission Set while ignoring the other.

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  19. Add support for deploying a name change to a SFDC component (such as profile)

    We occasionally change profile names during permssions clean-up projects. Currently, when you deploy a profile with a changed name, Gearset recognizes it as a "new" and a "deleted" profile, instead of a single "changed" component, which makes the deployment challenging.

    I know that the name is used as an identifier, since the Id may not always match between source and target. However, if you add support for this, the tool could try to identify components with name changes by looking for the same Id in source and target with a changed name.

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  20. Individual Assignment ruleEntry

    Please Allow us to Deploy individual Assignment ruleEntry rather than the whole file/set, similar to components in other objects, sharing rules.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  • Don't see your idea?

Feedback and Knowledge Base