Skip to content

General

General

Categories

556 results found

  1. Currently we are not syncing the attachments from ADO requirements or bugs to PractiTest nor from PractiTest bugs to ADO. It would be great if we can do a 2 way sync for the requirements as well.
    Many times the big requirements have attached docs which are essential for a tester to see to create test cases.
    Bugs in ADO will have screenshots and log files attached and they need to sync across to the PractiTest as well.
    Also when a bug is created from PractiTest to flow thru to ADO it will/should have screen shots attached along with other…

    24 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    planned  ·  1 comment  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  2. You should give the users to add fields at test step level.

    They should be allowed to Add things like Test Data for a particular step like Large Queries it it. For us the Test Precondition or Test Description or Test Name cannot be used for that purpose.

    22 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. I see it is possible to create one issue only by sending one request. I would like to create multiple issues in one request.

    2 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  4. I would be interested by having a way to group different values of a field used to create a pie chart in 1 "super value"
    To give an example:
    For the Requirement items, I would like to have a pie with only 2 values :
    - Not Covered
    - Covered
    As of today, we have: Not Covered, No Run, Passed, Failed...
    I would like to be able to present a dashboard to my manager with the value "Covered" including all the values except Not Covered and Not Covered.

    3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. Creating a daily report to see what test cases have been changed, so that we can keep our testsets up to date with the new changes in the library.

    adding what changed as a report option would simplify the work flow of opening up Project History

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. We would love the ability to run cURL commands form within Practitest so that we can launch our automation from within a test run.

    3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  7. PractiTest supports a synchronization with YouTrack, especially for the bug creation (from PractiTest to YouTrack).

    There is currently no way to change the call on PractiTest test side.
    YouTrack proposes a feature to update object on Event, such as issue creation.
    I would need to identify that the issue is coming from PractiTest, and then I would be able to make my change on YouTrack side.

    The signature includes 2 fields, which are not filled today: externalId and externalUrl, which shall be filled in my opinion when the issue is created from an external tool.

    Could you please fill at…

    3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  8. Currently, test modification email notification does not inform the Test admin about the exact changes done at step description and step expected result. This is must needed request . Even Project history does not keep the record of test modification at the level of Steps description and Step expected result

    3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  9. Currently we are running into a wall with re-usability. Either we don't use parameters,and there's no re-usability and alot of cloned code for one single functionality, or we use parameters and every test with "Call steps from another test" will have to set up all the parameters on test set run.

    I propose a way to set parameter values on a test level. So when we use "Call steps from another test", all the parameters for that called test are possible to be set from within the current test, allowing for a lot more re-usability within tests. Not all should…

    5 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  10. When we create custom fields or modify a System field, it would be great to add a Description that we could then view as a tool tip in the entity. This would give more context around the importance or purpose of the field and would give testers a more compelling reason for filling it in.

    Right now, we document the purpose and description of each of the fields and filters we have set up in a wiki page. It would be nice to be able to manage this directly from PractiTest.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  11. Hello, Can we request to remove text " PractiTest: Linked Results (Runs)" from the view of the main screen and omit from issue type which are not integrated in setting of the project ? We just want to see it on the right pane which is ok

    Is there any possibility to add this feature?

    Thanks,
    Faisal

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  12. Alphabetize user names in groups. Searching for a particular user would be much easier.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  13. While creating a Permutation of a test set, after selecting all the field values of the new permutation and clicking on the Next button. On the next page, I get a list of all permutations which can only be selected but not editable. It will be good if the user can also edit it and give a Test Set name whatever suits. Because this feature is not available currently, I have to create the Test Set first and then edit it to change the test set name which suits my requirements.

    6 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  14. Add the ability to «Click here to create a new Requirement / test»:
    It's possible to create a new Requirement or test with the relevant value in the fields automatically if we create it from the boutton «Click here to create a new Requirement / test». And it's possible to always keep the button «Click here to create a new Requirement / test» at the top of each filter page ?

    9 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  15. Ability to upload requirement without duplicating, but the changes in the new upload are made on the requirement. History is captured to track what changed, when, how and by whom.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  16. We would like the ability to print out empty test sets so that we may route them for review and approval. This report would print out the test set with each test case and their steps in a similar format to a detailed instance report (without the need of creating individual runs for each instance and leaving them blank).

    An alternative would be to have a way to batch create runs for test instances so that we may use existing reports to print out our Test Protocol.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  17. Similar to Preconditions in Test Run, add a field Test Data that shows up while running a test

    3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  18. When Practitest generates a 'detail' report of tests, in Excel format, there are two blank columns on the left (A & B) and a lot of blank rows padding the report. These blanks waste space on the screen/ sheet when printing. I have to manually remove these every time, which wastes time. Please could you take them out of the default report ?

    8 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  19. Currently the API v2platform supports Delete method call for object such as Steps/Requirements/Tests/TestSets.
    As part of our work in the company we post automated runs results to the run data of an instance and sometimes it accumulates a huge amount of runs in the history which slows down the retrieval of data via the Practitest platform.
    so it would be nice if we could delete the runs from the history either bulk deletetion or by ID

    5 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  20. When an issue is created from a test, the associated requirements could be linked (if Jira requirements, then the Jira requirement link) to the issue document (perhaps appended to description, or to a field defined in Practitest by the user) before being sent to Jira.
    Why? So in Jira a developer can click straight on the requirement to see what should happen, rather than dig through a number of screens to access the requirement

    26 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    planned  ·  3 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  • Don't see your idea?