1.
Welcome!

2.
Agenda
–18:00-18:20 Gathering
–18:20-19:00 The right tool for the right project | Ori Bendet
–19:00-19:05 PIZZAS!
–19:00-19:45 Surviving the Storm - continuous testing in the world of SaaS & Cloud |
Karim Fanadka
–19:45-20:30 networking and Pokémon party outside the office (2 Pokéstops w/ lures)

3.
Have any ideas for a future meetup?
–Contact me: r2d2@hpe.com
3

4.
Please give us a 5-star rating!
4

5.
The Right Tool for the Right
Project
@bendet_ori

6.
6y in HPE
Software
in various
managerial
QA rolesToday - Inbound
PM for a new
cloud testing
offering
ABOUT ME

7.
Michael's Father
Naomi’s Husband
ABOUT ME

8.
For small talk
later…
ABOUT ME

9.
State of
AutomationThe poll!

10.
Now Let’s Get
To Business!

11.
Assumption #1
15
Vendors only use their own tools

12.
Assumption #2
16
Evil corporates hate Open Source

13.
Assumption #3
17
Everybody is doing automated
testing

14.
My Own
Automaton
Journey

15.
Project #1
AUT: Analytic Platform
Automation: Internal Standalone Tool
19

16.
Analytic Platform for IT Executives (v 1.0)
– AUT technology Stack
– Glassfish Server
– Flex + GWT
– SAP BODS for ETLs
– SAP BOE for BI
– MSSQL
– Automation
– People doing automation: 0.5 / 5
– Focusing mainly on APIs
– Java Beans (EJBs)
– Internal tool called FIST
– ROI: LOL
20
3.5 hours to install

17.
21

18.
22

19.
23

20.
24
An extendable Java class

21.
25

22.
Why?
26

23.
Lessons Learned
StandaloneTool developed internally
– Cons
– Nobody knew about the tool, wasn’t cool, no buzz around it
– External tool: unable to get DEV to cooperate with automation (or even install the tool)
– Manually triggered (no part of the CI process)
– Almost every new test required changes to be done by DEV (expose new API methods)
– No direct access to source code
– Pros
– Small investment
– QTTV
– Easily extendable
– Stability
27

24.
Analytic Platform for IT Executives (v 1.0 2.0)
– AUT technology Stack
– Glassfish Server
– Flex + GWT
– SAP BODS for ETLs
– SAP BOE for BI
– MSSQL
– Automation
– People doing automation: 4 / 10, dedicated developer to assist
– Focusing mainly on APIs Automation installation, E2E flows
– Java Beans (EJBs) REST APIs
– Internal tool called FIST Internally built framework REST client, Selenium, Flex Monkey
– Automatic Deployment Solution: internally developed tool called Slick
– ROI: 3 MD each sprint  1 MM per release
28
Automatic Deployment Solution

25.
29
Saved over 10K MH

26.
Why?
– High demand for automation coverage
– Developers selected the automation framework
– Wanted to work together with developers
– Invested in automated installation as well
30

27.
Lessons Learned
Internally built Automation Framework (inside the IDE)
– Cons
– Required more coding skills
– Large effort of getting things started
– Harder to be used by less-technical testers
– UI automation stability
– Pros
– Harness developers into the automation
– Developers re-used testing assets for their own benefits
– Testers have access to source code
– Part of the CI process
31

28.
Project #2
AUT: Performance Testing tool
Automation: Open Source
32

29.
Performance Testing tool
– AUT technology Stack
– nodeJS
– AngularJS
– Internal SQLlite
– Automation
– People doing automation: 1 / 4
– System tests leveraging developers assets
– Focus on API testing, sanity level UI testing
– Application Modeling for less-technical testers
– Protractor, Mocha, Jasmine
– ROI: 1.5 MD / sprint
33
Protractor

30.
Without the framework
With the framework
REST API

31.
Without the framework
With the framework
UI:

32.
Test (created by non-technical engineer)

33.
Why?
– Best available choice for the technology stack
– 1 automation engineer working on the framework, others re-using the assets
37

34.
Lessons Learned
Leveraging DEV assets and extending into our own framework (+ modeling)
– Cons
– Modeling takes time
– Technical engineer becomes the bottleneck
– UI automation stability
– Pros
– Use existing developers assets
– Extend automation coverage using non-technical engineers
– Modeling eases tests maintenance
38

35.
Project #3
AUT: Firefox plugin
Automation: Commercial Tool (LeanFT)
39

36.
TruClient?
TruClient is a tool for recordingWeb-based applications. It is used inside LoadRunner for performance
testing on the browser level
40
1. TruClient Sidebar
2. TruClient Toolbox
3. Firefox browser
4. Application Browser Window
5. TruClient Sidebar Status Pane

37.
TruClient
– AUT technology Stack
– Firefox Plugin
– Pure Web
– WPF
– Windows app
– Automation
– People doing automation: 2 / 6
– Did not have an automation suite as they could not find a tool which has automation abilities for the full flow – including the three technologies.
– Supports the three main browsers and needs an automation tool that can identify and test the objects in all the supported browsers
– Selected LeanFT as the tool
41

38.
The Automation Suite
42
LeanFT Application
Model
Containing the full AUT
the App Model displays
Modular view of all the
implemented in the
application

39.
The Automation Suite
43
LeanFT test
- Everything is written in the IDE, Dev have
them for sanity)
- Test code is completely reusable among the
- The test is authored once, and can be run on
- In the test setup, the TruClient launcher –
and being used, and during the test, web and
technologies are tested.

40.
Why?
– Cross Technology support (Desktop & Web)
– Script once – run of all browsers
– Re-use, share testing assets with Dev
44

41.
Want to buy a new automation framework for 1 shekel??
45

42.
The Automation Council
46

43.
47

44.
The Guidelines
48

45.
Rule #1
49
Accessible in the developers
workspace

46.
Rule #2
50
Cross Browsers/Technology
Support

47.
Rule #3
51
Ability to easily model the UI

48.
Rule #4
52
Full support for REST APIs testing

49.
Rule #5
53
DB Layer

50.
Rule #6
54
Ability to combine UI/API/DB in 1
flow

51.
Rule #7
55
Messaging Parser (json, XML, etc.)

52.
Rule #8
56
Parameterization of tests

53.
Rule #9
57
CI/CD complaint

54.
Rule #10
58
Modularity to allow re-use by less
tech eng

55.
59

56.
FIST Selenium built FWK LeanFT UFT
IDE √
Cross X Mobile/Web
Model the UI
REST API testing X*
DB Layer X*
Combine UI/API/DB X*
Parsers X*
Parameterization
CI/CD
Modularity for less-tech
Cross Platforms
Lightweight
60= can be added by user

57.
Summary
Time

58.
Assumption #1
62
Vendors only use their own tools

59.
Assumption #1
63
Vendors only use their own tools
It’s not about the tool

60.
Assumption #2
64
Evil corporates hate Open Source

61.
Assumption #2
65
Evil corporates hate Open Source
We love Open Source!!

62.
Assumption #3
66
Everybody is doing automated
testing

63.
Assumption #3
67
Everybody is doing automated
testing
Everybody is using automated
testing

64.
Take Home Message
68

65.
It’s never about the tool
It’s about finding
the right tool for the right
project