General Discussion

manual and automated tests, merging

Started by jdixon2007 on 2,603 views

Can ncrunch capture coverage from manual testing efforts and merge that coverage with automated results?

Thanks
Hi, thanks for posting.

In terms of its feature-set, no. NCrunch can only capture results from automated test execution.

However, there is a rather hacky way of having it capture results from a manual test run. This is to write an 'explicit' automated test that bootstraps the UI of your application (with a very high timeout value), then manually test the application and close it down when you're done, completing the test. The coverage capturing system doesn't know the difference between software being driven manually vs. automatically.

Note that although the above is possible in theory, the software was never designed with this as an intended use case. You'll likely hit some rough edges. I recommend automation instead.
Thanks, that may work. Can cov results be merged/aggregated? We have in proc and out of proc results I need to aggregate, automation wise, then at tail end manual test to augment (till they get automated). Can you folks do that?
jdixon2007 wrote:Thanks, that may work. Can cov results be merged/aggregated? We have in proc and out of proc results I need to aggregate, automation wise, then at tail end manual test to augment (till they get automated). Can you folks do that?


I really recommend experimenting a bit yourself with NCrunch to see if you can find a way to achieve the result you're aiming for. I say this because NCrunch does do the things you are asking for, but it may not do them in the sequence or manner that you are expecting it to do so. NCrunch is designed to be a background automated test runner. It CAN capture manual test results, but this was never an intended use case, so you will likely need to adapt your way of working to suit the rough edges if you intend to use the product in this way. I unfortunately can't warrant that the software will provide you with exactly what you want, because the workflow you're suggesting is one that we've never tested before with the product.

Post a reply

Log in to reply.