Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Acceptance Test writing level #595

Closed
Stephen-Gates opened this issue Mar 25, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

Acceptance Test writing level #595

Stephen-Gates opened this issue Mar 25, 2018 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
i:Tests Issues about automated testing
Milestone

Comments

@Stephen-Gates
Copy link
Contributor

I've been cleaning up the Edit acceptance tests. I've written them at a high level (e.g. insert row above) and @mattRedBox has written them at a low level (e.g. insert row below).

We need to agree a level that both works as user documentation and supports automated testing.

It seems that high level tests can be automated looking at cucumber pro documentation (Matt I've sent an invite)

@Stephen-Gates Stephen-Gates added the i:Tests Issues about automated testing label Mar 25, 2018
@Stephen-Gates
Copy link
Contributor Author

E.g. Do we need

Given Data Curator is open

in every test?

@Stephen-Gates
Copy link
Contributor Author

Stephen-Gates commented Mar 25, 2018

Did a big clean up of tests to finalise the move to Cucumber Pro. Things to note:

  • the line breaks in the user story aren’t respected like they were in Relish (fix by adding two trailing spaces)
  • there is no equivalent to the .nav feature
  • readme.md are displayed with other .features, not used a section intro
  • you can use underline method for markup headings in feature descriptions
  • there are Cucumber anti-patterns including "Scenarios that use 'I' as in the personal pronoun" which I have addressed
  • you can choose a branch to view
  • you can have a discussion about an individual line in the feature
  • Cucumber Pro public roadmap shows new features - vote for your favourites

screenshot 2018-03-25 17 47 10

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Mar 26, 2018

Hi @Stephen-Gates
The tests steps I've added are necessary to cue the actual mechanics of the underlying framework to step through the tests.

As/If I get more time to work on them, with common behaviour, then yes I can abstract these away into a higher level feature that can be used.
And in regards to questions like:
Given Data Curator is open
then yes these too can be moved into what are known as common 'background' mechanics that can operate across multiple tests.

However I think there isn't much that needs to be done - as you are engaging these at a high level, continue to write these at that level. As I interact with these, if more specifics are needed to cue test mechanics then I need to add these - but with time and common behaviours I can abstract them back into something higher level. But not without being allocated time for these within sprints.

@Stephen-Gates Stephen-Gates added this to the v0.13.0 milestone Apr 1, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
i:Tests Issues about automated testing
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant