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. 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 →
  2. 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

  3. 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.

    Ordersx
    Customers
    x
    ...

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

    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 →
  4. 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 →
  5. 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 →
  6. 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 or 2…

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

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

  7. 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 →
  8. 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 →
  9. 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 →
  10. 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 →
  11. 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 →
  12. 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 →
  13. 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 →
  14. Be able to switch the direction of a comparison/deployment

    Sometimes we need to reconcile changes on an object between two orgs, where some of the changes have been made in Org1 and some in Org2. Having set up metadata filters, compared and deployed required changes from Org1 to Org2, it would be nice to be able click a button to switch direction to then deploy required changes from Org2 back to Org1, without having to go through the whole process of setting up a new comparison.

    5 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 →
  15. Clickable Jira Request within Deployment Report

    I would like the ability within the deployment report to make the jira tickets clickable. That way a user could simply click the ticket reference to navigate directly to the request.

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

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

  16. Enforce code coverage limits on CI jobs

    Please set it so that we can force a code coverage check on deployments (including CI). I'd like to verify on the lowers before going through to production. Might be able to do this with test cases but should be able to on 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  ·  Deployment automation  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  17. Provide link from standard field to Standard Value Set

    Some of the standard picklist fields in Salesforce have their values defined in Standard Value Sets. This means when you add a new value in the Salesforce UI, for example in the Type field of the Case object, that you are actually editing the CaseType Standard Value Set and not the Case Custom Object.

    Gearset detects all these differences, but it isn't obvious why Case.Type appears as unchanged in a Gearset comparison. It would be better if Gearset showed some help text in the Case.Type object definition that pointed me to some help docs or linked me to the exact…

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

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

  18. Allow renaming of picklist values instead of creating new and deactivating

    Currently, when you rename existing picklist values in the source org (including renaming the API name of that value), Gearset will deploy this to the target org as a new picklist value and deactivate the old value. This means we have to manually delete the value in the target org and specify which value to use to replace on existing records.

    It would be great if Gearset could give the option to map a picklist value in the source to a picklist value in the target and allow a rename of the value in the target.

    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  ·  New feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  19. Show filtered counts on the results grid tab titles

    When comparing two orgs. We need to show the eaxact number in the Tabs(Changed Items, New Items) when filtered.

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

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

  20. Add an Ignore option for change alerts

    Sometimes metadata comes back from Salesforce in a different order, which makes it look like there was a change when there really wasn't any. It would be nice to have a way to flag such comparisons as Ignored so I know I looked at them and decided that they didn't need to have any further action.

    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 →
  • Don't see your idea?

Feedback and Knowledge Base