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. Add deployment support for Macros

    Macros deserve to be added to source control yet there is no way to do this with Gearset:

    1) Data feature (paid add-on) doesn't deploy to/from source
    2) PRO/Enterprise can't source/target deploy Macros because it is not available with the Metadata API.

    Since macros represent some debugged logic, managing in source control makes sense. Curiously, SFDC has chosen to make Documents available via Metadata API but not Macros

    2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  New feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  2. Zapier Integration

    An integration with Zapier will allow more customizations options for how we can integrate with other tools, such as Manuscript (fka FogBugz).

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

  3. Access to Jira custom fields

    we have a custom field we use that ties to a release number. It would be great if as an additional option to selecting tickets, access this field, set the value (in this case our release number) and have gearset pull all related requests in.

    5 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

  4. Cache deployment inspection results

    It would be great if deployment inspection results were cached, such that the results for an identical set of metadata are available without spending the time to recheck everything.

    Use case: A comparison is performed and all changes selected. Deployment inspection is performed and recommendations are made for items to add/exclude. I select a subset of recommendations, and move forward with validation. The validation fails. The same comparison is reopened and again all metadata is selected (with the intention of selecting more of the add/export recommendations resulting from the inspection). At this point, the inspection is rerun, even though the…

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  5. 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…

    3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  New feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  6. When source is local files, Refresh Comparison button should be smarter

    If your source is Local files, and you do a Compare to some target, and then realize the source needs to be amended before re-comparing, your "training" is to clock "Refresh Comparison" button.

    This executes but does not ask you to upload new source files so essentially nothing happens.

    User should be given option to upload new folder/zip.

    2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

  7. Avoid spurious Analyzer message when deploying external objects (e.g. Foo__x)

    If you create a new org, add an External Data Source, add External Objects, and deploy to a target (source control), you will get this spurious analyzer message:

    "Some standard object fields which don't exist in the target organization are being deployed, which indicates they might use features not enabled in the target. You need to remove these from the deployment, otherwise it's likely to fail."

    and all your external objects are enumerated, e.g.

    Orders__x
    Customers__x
    ...

    These are not standard objects, and, as they are new, would of course not be in the target. Analyzer is being too "discerning"

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  8. Deploy parts of Settings

    It would be nice if you broke up the settings into smaller subcomponents. For example the Security settings would be more useful if you extract out the password policy changes so we can pick and choose what Security settings we need. I thought of this concept similar to how you break up profiles into sub component. This could get noisey in the list of changes so an alternative to that could be to bundle it under components like how CustomObjects work.

    2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  New feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  9. Add Run all tests except .... configuration in CI job

    Our CI jobs take way too long (1000+ tests) despite heroic efforts to use ApexMocks. As our org contains a bunch of unmanaged packages with known class name prefixes, and these constitute at least 10% of the total tests; we could get back 10% of our life if we could exclude these from the "run only your tests"

    For example, we would want to exclude running any tests in classes that start with "fflib" and "sfab"

    A variation of this would be to run a specific testSuite and it would be our responsibility to keep the testsuite up to date

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Deployment automation  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  10. Add a note against individual components in a draft deployment

    While comparing two Org's for differences and saving the 'Draft deployment':

    1. Files that I'm sure and fine with the differences and happy - so tick them.

    2. Files that are important to be deployed but I am yet to discuss those differences with some peers from team (dev / support). I would like to mark these (or / and) comment against these - with some useful notes (ex: impact or risk analysis related notes). Once these are discussed, I can then tick them - indicating I am happy to deploy these.

    Once I mark the files as either 1…

    2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

  11. Ability to have automated process to maintain field list in Production environment

    With GDPR, companies are required to provide justifications for all data that they collect. In Salesforce this means being able to identify why all fields in the system exists, categorize fields as PI, and provide business justifications. The ability to keep a list of current fields in a production instance of Salesforce that includes alerts when new items are added, or ability to sync that list out to another tool like Smartsheet, where other business users like a legal team would have visibility, would be incredibly useful.

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Monitoring and reporting  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  12. Ability to manually hide/filter component differences by single flag

    When reviewing comparisons it would be extremely helpful to have the ability to manually 'hide' a component difference (e.g. a single flag to filter out, ignore, or even 'grey' a component differences) once you have a) reviewed the XML and b) determined you do not want to deploy or view that component in a saved draft. I.e. a third state that is not simply 'selected' or 'deselected'.

    Current filters by component type, name, et al. don't accommodate for wanting to hide a known component difference (e.g. like an Apex class still under development) so that you can only see remaining…

    2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

  13. Allow (restricted) editing of source XML to add deployable properties that can't be fetched via Metadata API

    related to: https://gearset.uservoice.com/forums/283474-help-us-improve-gearset/suggestions/14808303-allow-source-metadata-to-be-customised-prior-to-de

    Example:
    It is impossible with OOTB Gearset to deploy an autonumber field with a starting number and optional populate existing rows. Why? Because the SFDC Metadata API as of V42 doesn't allow fetching of these two properties of the CustomField object:

    <populateExistingRows>true</populateExistingRows>
    <startingNumber>1</startingNumber>

    Once in source, they'll deploy just fine to the target org. Note that changesets support this feature.

    The workaround, which is to deploy to target branch and then edit target branch is sort-of-OK but it would be nice to modify this in the source. Of course, if you Refreshed Comparison, your edits would be…

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Deployment automation  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  14. 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…

    2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

  15. Scheduled deployment freezes

    Prevent deployments during certain periods of time for a team or for production environments

    8 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Deployment automation  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  16. Allow repeat/redo deployment from Deployment History

    Use case:

    1. Deploy from source to target
    2. Some testing (or possibly PR review) in target requires fixes to be redeployed from source to target

    Currently, you either do a new Comparison or clone the Deployment and re-enter the source and target. In either situation this is tedious.

    Why not add a "Redo" button on the Deployment History that uses the same source/target? Place it next to the Clone button?

    Or, in the Clone button, default the source and target to the same as the selected Deployment? (which would also be useful)

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Deployment automation  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  17. Add an option to use a custom "Gearset format" for the source control output

    The XML that comes from Salesforce is weirdly bundled together. When changes are made it's really hard to reconcile two branches in source control when merging.

    When comparing, Gearset nicely decomposes changes into smaller chunks. So instead of putting that back into the usual XML, an option to store that "internal format" and even just stick it as JSON or similar.

    After all - it'll be Gearset reading it back in to compare to an org next time, and smaller changes will be easier to merge as they won't conflict inside horrendously large XML files

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Comparisons and difference visualization  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  18. Better error message when refreshing draft deployments created by another user

    Currently, if source control is either source or target and User A creates a draft deployment bit user B wants to refresh that draft deployment, you get an error message: "Error occurred during operation: Determining API versions - An unknown error occurred."

    As this capability isn't currently supported by Gearset, there should be an error message when the refresh comparison button is clicked saying" Refresh is not possible when Source control is involved except by original creator of the draft deployment"

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Bug  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  19. 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.

    2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

  20. Filter Notifications for Non-CI Deployments By Successful or Not

    When I do a deployment that is not a CI deployment, it can send an email. But the email goes out regardless if the deployment is successful. I would like to be able to send the email ONLY if the deployment is successful.

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Deployment automation  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  • Don't see your idea?

Feedback and Knowledge Base