Automating system level test execution can result in many problems. It is surprising to find that many people encounter the same problems, yet they are not aware of common solutions that have worked well for others. These problem/solution pairs are called “patterns.” Seretta Gamba recognized the commonality of these test automation issues and their solutions and, together with Dorothy Graham, has organized them into Test Automation Patterns. Although unit test patterns are well known, Seretta and Dorothy’s patterns address more general issues. They cover management, process, design, and execution patterns to help you recognize common test automation issues and show you how to identify appropriate patterns to solve the problems. Issues such as No Previous Automation, High ROI Expectations, and High Test Maintenance Cost are addressed by patterns such as Maintainable Testware, Tool Independence, and Management Support. Laptop required (with USB access). An offline version of the wiki will be available to copy to your laptop from a USB stick to use during the session.
Seretta Gamba
Seretta Gamba has more than thirty years of experience in software development. As test manager at Steria Mummert ISS GmbH, Seretta was charged with improving the test automation process. After studying the current strategies, she developed a style of keyword-driven testing and a framework to support it. In 2009, the framework was extended to support manual testing. Speaking about this at EuroSTAR, Seretta got the attention of Dorothy Graham who subsequently invited her to contribute a chapter to Dot’s book Experiences of Test Automation. After reading the entire book, Seretta noticed recurring patterns in solving automation problems and is currently intent on cataloguing test automation patterns.
When working on test automation, it seems that even though you have done everything right—good architecture, efficient framework, and good tools—you still don’t make progress. The product Seretta Gamba’s team was to automate had become so successful that anyone with even a little domain knowledge was sent to the field while those left on the automation team didn’t really know the full application. In typical Catch-22 fashion, the regression testing workload prevented testers from supporting the automation team who therefore could not automate what would have effectively reduced the regression test load. Seretta reasoned that since testers used exactly the same information needed to execute manual tests, the most efficient way to “harvest” tests would be to extend the test automation framework to also support manual testing. Learn how Seretta succeeded in giving better support to manual testing while simultaneously collecting the data needed to finally move on with test automation.