B2G/QA/Automation/UI/Strategy: Difference between revisions
< B2G | QA | Automation | UI
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Plan) |
|||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
* Test results have too many spurious failures to sheriff | * Test results have too many spurious failures to sheriff | ||
* Test results only looked at a limited number of times per day | * Test results only looked at a limited number of times per day | ||
* Community paths poorly defined and advertised | * Community paths are poorly defined and advertised | ||
=Plan= | =Plan= | ||
Revision as of 00:32, 13 February 2015
Team Mandates
- Establish visible subject matter expertise in automation
- Own, expand and maintain QA acceptance test automation
- Increase confidence in acceptance test automation
- Provide expert assistance to improve all phases of UI test coverage
- Catch problems quickly and effectively
- Increase community support for FxOS QA
- Increase quality of and confidence in the product
Challenges
- Automation systems and concerns are poorly documented
- Development and QA have different approaches and needs from UI testing
- UI tests have had no developer support, largely because of Python implementation
- Team has been blocked too much by cross-team dependencies
- Test results are hidden in Jenkins
- Test results have too many spurious failures to sheriff
- Test results only looked at a limited number of times per day
- Community paths are poorly defined and advertised
Plan
For Acceptance:
- Streamline execution for increased responsiveness with less effort
- Document how we develop and execute Acceptance automation
- Develop Gaia Acceptance, based on Marionette JS
- Increase coverage using Gaia Acceptance
For Integration:
- Assist the functional teams by increasing Gaia Integration coverage
- Port Gaia Integration Python tests to JavaScript for wider ownership
For Community: