Log in to your harness - The Modern Software Delivery Platform® account to give feedback

Feature Requests

Anonymous

Feature Requests for Harness. Select 'Category' based on the module you are requesting the feature for.
Feature Request: Harness NG Feature Request: harness webhooks for pipeline execution events
To integrate efficiently, we would like to be able to register endpoints to be called with Harness events (like how we register webhooks with GitHub to receive GitHub events). WebHook endpoints will be internal and should be called via delegate (or have the option to be called from the delegate). Minimum events needed: Pipeline start/end (include all details in payload) Stage start/end (include all stage details in payload) Pipeline/stage interrupt/resume events (pause, approval needed, timeout, abort, reject, approval resume, etc.) Pipeline created/updated Solution: Solution is describe above: webhooks for pipeline events. Additionally, we would be fine with consuming events delivered to any type of pub/sub bus as well (SNS Topic, Redis pub/sub, SQS queue, etc.). Having more data on the events would be useful, so we can avoid having to query the API for the key data that make user-friendly notifications and automated actions feasible. the name and tags of the pipeline, and the variable inputs of the pipeline execution the name of the stage, and the variable inputs of the stage execution for failed or rejected pipelines and stages, the name and id of the failed stage and step, and the error or rejection message If these add on requests can't be accommodated, I would look to using the APIs to shim the feature. for #1, calling the audit API at short periodic intervals in order to simulate the events. for #2, calling the pipeline execution details API to get the needed values (once for each event. yikes)
22
·
Continuous Delivery &…
·
this fiscal quarter
Per-Project Concurrency Limits for Enterprise-Scale Resource Governance
Enable Account administrators to set maximum concurrent pipeline execution limits for individual projects. Currently, without per-project controls, a single misconfigured project can exhaust shared cluster resources and cause platform-wide disruptions affecting other applications. What we need: Admin-configurable concurrency limits per project (e.g., Project A max 20 concurrent executions) Real-time enforcement with queuing/rejection when limits are reached Exception process for high-priority projects API support and full audit logging Minimal performance impact on pipeline starts (<100ms) Why the two-bucket approach is insufficient: The current PIPE_PROJECT_LEVEL_EXECUTION_CONCURRENCY feature flag groups all projects into only two buckets. For large enterprises managing thousands of projects, this lacks necessary granularity—a misconfigured project in either bucket can still exhaust resources for all other projects in that bucket. This approach redistributes risk rather than eliminating it. Business Impact: Prevents platform-wide outages caused by runaway pipelines Ensures fair resource allocation across all teams Provides parity with legacy CI/CD platforms where this control existed Critical for enterprise customers operating at scale with thousands of applications Expected Workflow: Admin sets per-project limit → Pipeline checks current executions → Enforces limit (start, queue, or reject) → Audit logging → Admin can monitor and adjust as needed
4
·
Continuous Delivery &…
·
this fiscal quarter
Load More