SpiraTest

Very simple tool that works well within our organisation

주석: The major benefit was the introduction of formalised test management processes that inherently increase the capability maturity of our organisation.

장점:

Very easy to use and setup. The requirement management is suitable and integrates well with test management and incident management (defects). By far the best part of the software is that we get all this are a very reasonable price.

단점:

Some inconsistencies with editing such as placing of 'save' button and the wording for those buttons that are moderately unintuitive. Custom Reporting would be nice and the reports in general need work; as does the exporting of graphs (which are all black).

SpiraTest compares very well to other well known project management applications.

주석: SpiraTest compares very well to other well known project management applications.
SpiraTest beats Quality Center in the ability to create different workflows for multiple incident types, and workflow customization is based on a simple interface rather than on VBScript. The ability to link project artifacts together seems much easier and intuitive the Quality Center. Best of all, SpiraTest has a tool to communicate with Quality Center if you need to work in both applications.
SpiraTest also compares well with Pragmatic Software Planner. Information is much more accessible in SpiraTest, and everything actually works. Software Planner loses points for having a more rigid workflow, a non-intuitive interface, and for features that just don't work, like custom reports.

장점:

You can't beat SpiraTest without paying a lot more (and even then you might be disappointed). - Surprisingly easy set up. - Fantastic ease of use once you get used to the workflow paradigm (change status, verify newly required fields, then update). - Traceability: We love how all project components can be linked together. - Test case management: Create individual steps for each test case, and link steps from one test case to another to prevent step duplication. Create a test run, and send information to your automated testing software. Software testing heaven. - Workflow management: custom workflows by project or even by incident type. Cusomtization is implemented by interface, not language. - Support: Inflectra support has been fantastic in helping us migrate data into SpiraTest from our previous system. - Meets our needs: Our consulting firm needed a one-stop app that would work for multiple long- and short-term projects. We found SpiraTest, we tried it, and we love it.

단점:

Enhancements to current features, rather than new features, seems to be the rule: - ability to create and administer user groups on a project level instead of only at the application level. - mass updating of multiple artifacts (change all incidents with this type to that type) - update workflow transitions by user type instead of altering each transition. - Workflow takes a little getting used to; transitions must be performed in the following order - 1. Select the desired status, 2. Fill out ALL the newly required fields (check all the tabs), and then 3. Update. - Custom fields are hidden on their own tab in the lower half of the main pane. It would be nice to have the option to place some custom fields on the main pane. - Would be nice to be able to hide fields that aren't desired for a certain project. - Would like the ability to assign certain SysAdmin rights on a project level. - Would like a few more report cusomization options.

Love version 4 but we are unable to work with version 5

주석: My rating above is for Spiratest version 5. We have used and loved Spiratest for the last three years but we are considering stop using after seeing version 5 features. We upgraded to version 5 months ago and we have to downgrade it because we found it unusable. I was hoping something has gone wrong with the upgrade and we started a trial version hosted by Inflecta so we could create a brand new project and work with any problems and issues with tech support. It turns out the original upgrade was working fine and what we thought were bugs turned out to be features. We can't work with projects that force our test cases to be ordered alphabetically. To upgrade to version 5 will cause us to spend a lot of time creating custom fields and assigning numbers so we can see the test cases in the order we like. In addition, we will need to write code so we can have a report that doesn't list the test cases in alphabetical order. It doesn't make sense to us to spend time and resources trying to make the new version work like the previous version. I am not opposed to software changes and I am always happy to see improvements in new versions but this is a showstopper for us. We are in the process of deciding whether we need to keep to paying our annual fee if we are not going to continue upgrading the software. Sorry, we loved your software but you lost us here.

장점:

The colors

단점:

See my previous comments

Way better than Excel, Testuff, and other lower price point Test Management tools.

주석: Test data management without the risk of irreversible or unaudited changes.
A cloud accessible test management tool for my test team

장점:

The ability to group test cases, the folder hierarchy, test sets and test runs per release. So glad the all tests with tests steps view was added (Table view) Customisable reports are very useful once configured/scripted correctly (although the interface/mechanism is too complex for non-developers/non-technical people. It is far from intuitive)

단점:

Data imported to the Excel template via the Excel add-on should arrive in a format that could be immediately exported back to Spira. This would facilitate faster creation of duplicates with minor amendments, such as copying large tests sets to be rerun in a new release. Reporting. It's difficult to find the report you want without having to run one to see the story it tells. A snapshot of the report with generic data would be handy. Failing/blocking a test should start creating the incident. These should be seamless. Select existing incident should be an option there also. There should be a way to clear results from a step, not just select a different result. There needs to be a X by Y grid matrix of requirements to tests in Reports The Export to Excel option should work for multiple selections The data structure should be made available within the Reporting UI to facilitate customised report writing. A drag and drop UI would be a big improvement, as would a sample view to see the impact of your changes with dummy data without having to run the report The name of the current test should remain on screen while the steps for it are visible. As the last step scrolls off the screen the next test name can then appear.

Overall it's good an makes test management and running a lot smoother

장점:

The history features of test cases are nice. The ability to link requirements to test steps is nice (allthough could be improved as it is lost on clone). The tracking of progress is nice and ability to create incidents from a specific test steps helps a lot. All the different types of reports that are available to generate are also quite nice.

단점:

The lack of branching/versioning of test cases. This is a big con for us and we're hoping that it will be looked at in the future. Another problem is the linking of requirements to test steps, it feels like it's lacking a bit; it should be possible to 1. Clone a test case and keep the requirements on the test steps (currently they're lost) 2. If a requirement is just linked to a test step the result should be possible to link to that, currently if a step not at all related to the requirement fails the requirement will also fail. Also we'd like a report where it's easy to see the traceability and result of test run and requirement, e.g.: REQ1 PASSED REQ2 FAILED Currently it is possible to get the requirement and what Test case it is tested in and then print out all of the test cases to see the results. We'd just like a bit of an easier report/tracking here. If possible it would also be nice to add a comment to FAILED, maybe what test case failed (if it is tested in more than one) and perhaps even incident numbers of some sort.