From what I can determine you are categorizing the differences as follows:
Code in Source, not in Target – Highlighted in Green
Code in Target not in Source – Highlighted in Red
Difference between code in Source and Target – Highlighted in Yellow

When the difference between Source and Target, on a particular line, is only in the formatting. It would be nice if that was highlighted in a different color than yellow (perhaps grey). It would speed up the review of the code knowing a certain color was only a formatting difference.

I'd like to be able to name 'Pairs' of orgs so I don't have to re-select them, like 'DEV to UAT' or 'HOTFIX to Production'

Running tests displays overall org code coverage... it would be cool if you could provide individual class code coverage statistics as well, so we could get a good idea of what classes / triggers need attention

It would be great to have more control over the diff process - particularly to be able to ignore whitespace changes.

If I've made an actual function change to a class, and also auto-indented it, then it would be a lot easier to see the important change if I could hide the whitespace-only changes.

Having the ability to suppress whitespace-only changes on the list of changed objects would be really useful, too.

Having the comparison history is a great feature, but it would be very beneficial to be able to delete any data in the system, especially when working with a trial account. Part of testing could include working with test environments that you don't want to persist after going live. Also, peace of mind when ending the trial that your data has been removed.

I need to run my own tests (ie no namespace) daily as those should never fail and if they do I need to know

For namespace tests, I just need to run them weekly, primarily to reset the "invalid" flag on apex classes that can be tripped by trivial changes. I know some will fail as we have some huge apps installed and my understanding is that it's normal for dome of those managed tests to fail.

So I would only want to run them weekly to reduce the noise from the daily failure email. Just run those on Saturday.

We currently have a deployment pipeline for our .net and Rails environments that utilize VersionOne, GitHub, TeamCity and Ansible to deploy changes into AWS.
Due to auditing constraints we would like to use VesrionOne, GitHub and TeamCity to deploy our SF changes.
Does Gearset interact with these tools or must it stand on it's own?

I have certain metadata which is broken or dangerous to migrate from a dev org, I'd like to exclude it from this and subsequent releases. If I could 'right click' and ignore it that would be good.

In order to support a development pipeline (e.g. Dev Environment -> Staging Environment -> Production) allow Metadata from the source Org to be modified before deployment to the target Org.

e.g. I have a RemoteSiteSetting in source that points at https://dev.example.com and in my staging environment I need this to point to https://stg.example.com

It would be nice if there was a quick way of init'ing a new sandbox that matches either what was in source control or an existing sandbox.

Currently, I need to run a comparison between the existing source and the new sandbox and then I can try the deploy, but it would be nice if the compare step was not needed and I could simply say 'overwrite what is in the sandbox with what is in the specified source'

In Salesforce, you can cancel a deployment in progress: Maybe because a test has failed already and you don't want to bother running the rest, or because you forgot some things.

Can we have a cancel button while a deployment is in progress in Gearset? The metadata api seems to support it:

https://developer.salesforce.com/docs/atlas.en-us.apimeta.meta/apimeta/meta_canceldeploy.htm

I think it would be useful if Gearset had the capability to make a chatter post to a specific group or @mention someone.

Manage users on "My Team", so we can activate/deactivate users and then save on licences that are not used until reassigned.

The sheet exported from a comparison currently includes only one date column. It is unclear which org this refers to. It would be great if it included two columns (one per org) so that one didn't have to individually look up the item to determine which version is newer.

When deploying objects such as reports to a Target ORG, sometimes the reports are shared with a user in the source ORG. If the user does not exist in the Target ORG, the validation throws an error. Would it be feasible to add objects, such as reports, to the Warnings / Fixes screen so we can easily select how to handle user specific dependencies? Maybe we can chose to enter a new username or simply remove the shared with permission on the object?

Often you want to deploy Admin profile and (x) custom profiles. Compare and deploy picks up hundreds of entries for standard profiles which are surplus to requirements. A single click way would be veryuseful.

I would find it very useful if the comparison result highlighted if the difference was in the XML or the Code (or both) for each item. This would especially save time when there are a lot of differences.

Some of my orgs have many tests, and I don't always want to run all of them on a daily basis. Being able to specify which tests are run daily would be great.

It would be great to be able to select multiple items in a comparison using crtl or shift click, rather than checking the boxes one by one