Help us improve Gearset

Welcome to the Gearset feedback forum. We love getting feedback from our users on how we can make Gearset even better.

Post your ideas and vote for others – let us know what’s important to you. We’re keen to hear about product improvements, new features, and bug fixes alike. We check this forum regularly and will keep ideas updated with their current status. If you need any further support, please contact us at team@gearset.com.

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback
  1. Warning On Missing Custom Metadata Field

    I had a deployment fail today due to a difference between a custom metadata type's definition in the source org vs the destination. The source had two extra fields that the destination did not have. This cause the metadata record deployment to fail, because two extra values were included in the deployment which did not have corresponding fields in the destination. Because the fields were for a custom metadata package, I was unable to (easily) add the fields into the destination org.

    I'd like to see a way to suppress custom metadata values. This may be solvable through the inline…

    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

    0 comments  ·  Problem analysis and deployment failures  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  2. Save deployment analysis suggestions and list of test classes

    In order to make deployments more repeatable between orgs please allow a way to save the selection of deployment analysis suggestions an d list of test classes with a package. With a large package it can be difficult having to document or remember the same selections used in deployment to UAT org for Production deployment.

    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

  3. Possibility to add automatically added metadata to the comparison after a failed deployment

    The dependency crawler that GearSet offers is one of its biggest strengths. A lot of manual labor can vanish at the click of the button. Best example would be the addition of all relevant Picklist fields when a Record Type is added to the Selected Items.

    Sometimes deployments still fail, and in particularly big orgs the dependency crawl takes ages, each time I have to rerun the problem analysis.

    A way to add the metadata that was auto-added prior to the deployment to the list of Selected Items to make future analysis faster would be greatly appreciated.

    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

    0 comments  ·  Problem analysis and deployment failures  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  4. Report Missing Dependencies on Lightning pages

    Right now, if you include a lightning page in a deployment and do not include any of the components on the page (list view, report chart, etc), the problem analyzer finds no issue with it.

    Even if the report is not in the target or is included in the compare, the analyzer always finds no issue with the lightning page.

    It'd be great to have it function like other metadata where it would alert you to missing components in your package (by suggesting to include all referenced list views, reports, etc on the lightning page).

    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

    0 comments  ·  Problem analysis and deployment failures  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  5. Improve error handling for invalid XML metadata files

    Currently, when there is an error with an XML metadata file (usually introduced by git merges), Gearset will produce an error, either in the Initializing Comparison, or Checking Deployment stages, stating simply that "An unknown error occurred."

    If Gearset instead ran the XML from source control through an XML validator using the Partner WSDL XMLSchema, then we could get file-level validation errors if the XML doesn't conform to what Salesforce's Metadata API will accept.

    e.g.:
    $ xmlstarlet val -e -s ~/Downloads/salesforce-schema.xml force-app/main/default/profiles/Marketing.profile-meta.xml
    force-app/main/default/profiles/Marketing.profile-meta.xml:17108.15: Element '{http://soap.sforce.com/2006/04/metadata}field': This element is not expected.
    force-app/main/default/profiles/Marketing.profile-meta.xml - invalid

    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

  6. Static Code Analysis for JavaScript Components

    It would be great if Gearset could run static code analysis on JavaScript as well as Apex when deploying Lightning Components.

    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

  7. Remove the "run as specific user" completely from the dashboard prior to deployment (set the options to "Run as

    Add during problem analysis:

    Remove the "run as specific user" completely from the dashboard prior to deployment (set the options to "Run as logged-in user"). Deploy, then change it back to whatever you need. Based on https://developer.salesforce.com/forums/?id=906F0000000DCJPIA4

    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

  8. Improve the UI around deployment objects dependent on objects not in the comparison

    Deployment of certain types of objects requires that other objects on which they are dependent be included in the deployment. If the needed objects have not been included in the selected items and they are not part of the comparison, Gearset will display the following message:

    Problem: Some itmes reference componnents that were not downloaded from either the source or the target.

    Solution: Removing the elements that reference missing components from the affected items will make the deployment more likely to succeed.

    Below this is displayed a table with a column of checkboxes at the left and three additional columns:…

    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

    0 comments  ·  Problem analysis and deployment failures  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  9. Display "No Difference" metadata sources on Deployment Summary page

    On the "Deployment Summary Page" it would be great to add a column to the list of metadata components added which shows for the "No Difference" items showing the source piece(s) of metadata which is causing this "No Difference" to be included.

    This would dramatically help in the narrowing down of why a piece of metadata is included - especially if that piece of "No Difference" is a managed package and cannot be altered. In a large deployment, trying to identify a root cause for why a component was added is quite difficult. Simply giving a way to track back…

    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

    0 comments  ·  Problem analysis and deployment failures  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  10. Suppress irrelevant Suggested Fixes when deploying to git

    The problem analysis comes up with a number of Suggested Fixes which may make sense for improving Salesforce deployments, but which are unproductive when applied to git deployments.

    For example, the suggestion to remove TASK.WHAT_NAME, or to omit Standard Objects, will only serve to create a git repo which is an inaccurate reflection of the source org. Each time we deploy to that git repo, we will continue to have the same changes to select or omit, since the repo is missing objects and fields from the source org.

    When the deployment target is a git repo, all suggested fixes…

    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

  11. Deployment Notes Persist on Failure

    When a deployment fails, deployment notes are sometimes wiped, and it is laborious to retype them - sometimes, I'll copy and paste to Notepad before deploying because I know I'm going to have to type them again. Notes should persist, or at least be configurable, from one comparison run through successful deployment.

    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

  12. Better handle Shares on Report and Dashboard Folders in pre-validation

    during the pre-validation of a deployment, validate that the shares exist for report and dashboard folders. Currently if they do not exist in the target they fail during deployment. Only option today is to clean them up after error in source org and then redeploy. Instead, it would be useful if gearset removed them during the pre-validation.

    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

    0 comments  ·  Problem analysis and deployment failures  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  13. Queue Deployments

    Current State:

    A few devs have work in their individual sandboxes that are ready to be pushed to the higher .dev sandbox org

    1st Dev deploys work to .dev

    2nd Dev deployment fails because org is locked

    Idea:

    A few devs have work in their individual sandboxes that are ready to be pushed to the higher .dev sandbox org

    1st Dev deploys work to .dev

    2nd Dev deployment is queued up, 2nd Dev will be notified via email/browser when queued deployment has started

    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

  14. Offer to push components that passed validation even if some items failed

    For large payloads (thousands of artifacts) it can be tedious to try to resolve a few minor issues when 99% of the package will deploy successfully. Having a feature to push stuff that passes validation would be helpful. Included in this in the deployment summary and deployment reports will be a count and list of items that failed validation and were omitted from the package so they can be investigated

    9 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

  15. add the ability to run static code analysis against an org or source control, simply click refresh button to re-run it and see results

    This will give you a "run code analysis -> see results -> fix issues -> push to source control (or an org) -> repeat" workflow.

    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

  16. 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

  17. Allow custom rules in PMD

    PMD support is great, but it would also be useful to be able to have a set of custom rules for my team

    e.g. we have a code library of classes that they ought to use instead of coding their own solutions every time. Some of these cases could be spotted by a PMD rule, so it would be great to be able to add my own rules for this.

    7 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

  18. 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…

    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

  19. Provide the option to skip problem analysis

    Sometimes during a complicated deployment I need to try a few different strategies to get things to work. For example, I may need to just send up one piece or set of metadata up first.

    The problem is, each time I do this, I have to wait for problem analysis to complete, which takes a couple minutes. Normally during a deployment I do want problem analysis to run, but if I want to quickly send up a single object, I have to wait a few minutes while Problem Analysis runs, and the time waiting adds up.

    Maybe a quick deployment…

    6 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

  20. Avoid Analyzer suggesting to deploy a workflow's Sobject when such SObject and all referenced fields exists in the target

    Use case:
    1. Deploy from source to target a changed Workflow (from active to deactivated)
    2. Target already has all of the workflow's referenced components (fields used in filter criteria, fields used in Field Update)

    Analyzer will tell you "Add the following to the deployment" and something that looks like:

    Deploy All
    - object.WfName
    -- object and its subcomponents
    -- object and its subcomponents
    -- object and its subcomponents

    Since the object is already in the target as are the subcomponents, this message is alarmingly misleading and could inadvertently lead to deploying an object not yet ready.

    The above message…

    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

  • Don't see your idea?

Feedback and Knowledge Base