62 results found
-
Each time steps are saved, the browser automatically rolled up to the first steps
It is a bit annoying to scroll back down again...
B.T.W - After "Remove step" is done, this "Auto Roll" does not occur.
Please do the same for the "Save Changes".
Thank you :)1 voteUpon review, most times this is not a problematic scenario.
-
"Show popular tags" like a dropdown
The current view is not very useful. We cannot see all the existing tags.
1 vote -
Add WiKi Mechanism
A mechanism which will allow to add all kind of text elements, starting from general description, project description, defect severity and/or priority description, rule of thumb, and WE, would be extremely useful.
1 voteWe already support rich edit on description fields, and we don’t plan to support wiki pages. You can add links to wiki pages if needed.
-
Fix issue of exported report PDF number / bullet lists
Since the time Practitest allowed rich text markup in test step description / expected result, it has caused some new issues to PDF report exporting that all the number list / bullet points would have become plain text with line breaks only.
1 voteHi,
Kindly note that the new Reports allow to create detailed reports for Tests where lists are displayed correctly.
At this time the new reports are available to download as Excel, but we are planning to release PDF option soon. Please go to Reports, to access them.
Thanks
Christine -
Export Tests in MS-Word format
Our testers and developers are used to reviewing tests in MS-Word format (not only in excel).
1 voteWe support to export entities in PDF format via the PRINT functionality
-
1 vote
-
Implement a richer Integration
Custom integration is far from confusing. I'm trying to integrate with leantesting.com for defect tracking and the two required fields are not enough to complete this integration. How do I specify an outside project ID or any other variables?
1 voteWe suggest you contact our support@practitest.com to review this integration. We may be able to help, but not sure if we will add it for now as one of our built-in supported integrations.
-
In some cases the expected result may be more then one
In does cases I'll be glad to add additional expected result to the same step
1 voteIt is correct that this may be the case, but in order to keep the system simple we choose to leave it as is. In any case you can define multiple options by using – or + or any other signs before the lines
-
allow additional user defineable status for test cases
It would be nice to have another status for test cases that are not able to be tested and need to be flagged for testing at the customer site.
1 voteHi Barb,
I am setting this one to declined based on the reason I wrote previously.
Please let me know if you don’t agree.
-joel -
1 vote
-
return cursor focus after saving a new requirement
When I am in the Tree View in Requirements and add a child to an existing parent then save, my focus returns to a strange random spot in the tree and I have to navigate back to where I was. Some are expanded and others collapsed. It would be nice if focus would return without having to collapse other entries that were not even accessed during the session.
1 vote -
add the ability to enter step parameters for tests (template tests)
this is same as test parameters in QC, since most of the times we write tests as a template that can get lots of parameters values that will trigger the same test expected results (e.g. equivalent classes, automation) we need to have the optio for a 'place holder' (like dates, values) that will be turned to valid data in the test set (AS AN INSTANCE).
the benefits are
1. reuse of tests
2. ability to write tests as early as possible
3. it is unecessary to wait for reference data before writing a test
4. work with additional file repository…1 vote -
1 vote
For this functionality we have the batch edit. The feature suggested is too close to it so we will not develop it.
-
Pre-populate test data from(linked) requirements data.
Pre-populate test data from(linked) requirements data.
Similar to the 'clone test' functionality but using a related requirement as the basis of the new test instead of another test. Particularly the requirement title - test title, requirement description - test description, as well as relevant fields (eg: requirement product component - test product component, etc etc). Perhaps the user could map custom fields together, eg: Map requirements field A to test field A (as long as they are the same type and with the same list values if a list)
0 votes -
Allow migration of test steps from one test to another
Test A has been created with test steps. Test B is a new test. Abilty to migrate the test steps (only) from Test A to Test B.
0 votes -
0 votes
-
Modify step's statuses automatically in the Practitest after marking them as closed in JIRA
2 way integration (Practitest<->JIRA)
the step/s was/were failed and I opened the bug in the JIRA.
Afterwards, the bug was fixes and after my verification I closed it.
I expect to see that if I closed bug in JIRA, the step/s will be updated automatically in the Practitest for relevant step/s0 votesAs a principle we do not believe in automatically modifying the status of the step based on the change of the issue, but we will add a more graphical indication that a bug linked to a step is closed so that you can retest it.
-
0 votes
-
0 votes
Hi,
since every user has the option to go to Reports Center this feature is irrelevant (unless you want to DISABLE report center to some users, which is a different feature request) -
0 votes
- Don't see your idea?