IS480 Team wiki: 2013T2 GENShYFT Documentation User
Home | Project Overview | Project Management | Documentation | The Team |
Overview | Diagrams | User Testing | Presentation | Prototype |
Regression Test
Adhering to the advice given by reviewers during Mid Term Review, we leveraged on the Automated Testing capabilities of Singpath and further extended it.
Although there are many different ways to implement the scripts for automated testing, we have decided on the one that is the most cost-effective in terms of resources required - E2E test
Automated E2E Tests
As our features in Singpath is already on the Live Server since Mid Terms, our development work may affect the existing codes and the most obvious indication that Singpath broke is not so much on the logic, but the view/display layer (User Interface).
To the end users, the pages will simply not load/show if there is something wrong with our code, to address that issue, we have specifically zeroed in to write additional test scripts to cover all of our pages.
How it works
Test scripts are written into a file within the application, and will be executed when it is sent to Travis CI, a distributed continuous integration service used to build and test projects hosted at GitHub, which is the repository that we have been using for the development of Singpath.
Travis CI automatically detects when a commit has been made and pushed to a GitHub repository that is using Travis CI, and each time this happens, it will try to build the project and run tests. Travis CI will also build and run pull requests. When that process has completed, it will notify our Client as well as showing the test results (success or failure) with our pull request (pre-deployment check).
What this means is that every time we commit and send a pull request, the test script is run automatically and we will be shown a result whether something in our new codes 'broke' the application. With this, we are confident to say that every time we push new changes to the live site, the view/display layer will always render.
Results/Outcome
Extended routeSpec.js test scripts by 125%, added 26 additional routing to the existing 19.
Win-win - our live deployment will never be shown 'broken pages', future teams can make use of our scripts (Value Add for Client)
User Testing
Method | Details | Documents | Results |
---|---|---|---|
Lab Experiment Heuristic Evaluation |
Date: 11/2/2014 Participants: 15 |
Tester's Package A |
|
Field Study Sample Survey |
Date: 19/3/2014 In-class Tournament Held [Real Life Use Case] |
Observation - Load Test Successful | |
Field Study | Date: 21/3/2014 Actual Tournament Held [Real Life Use Case] |
Sec Sch Post Tournament Survey Unable to administer survey; require clearance by sponsor IDA | |
Field Study Judgement Study |
Date: 29/3/2014 Actual Tournament Held [Real Life Use Case] |
JC Post Tournament Survey Results Tournament proceeded smoothly without hiccups | |
Field Study Judgement Study |
Date: 29/3/2014 Actual Tournament Held [Real Life Use Case] |
Poly Post Tournament Survey Results Tournament proceeded smoothly without hiccups |