Paper detail

Test Automation Process Improvement in a DevOpsTeam: Experience Report

How to successfully conduct test automation process improvement (TAPI) for continuous development, consisting of iterative software development, continuous testing, and delivery, is the challenge faced by many software organizations. In this paper, we present an experience report on TAPI in one DevOps team in F-Secure (a Finnish software company). The team builds Windows application software and exists in F-Secure's TAPI culture. The team self-reports high satisfaction and maturity in test automation for continuous development. To study their TAPI, we reviewed a collection of experience notes, team reflection reports and telemetry result reports. Then several meetings were held to discuss the details. We found that based on the understanding of the team, test automation maturity for continuous development is defined as a set of indicators, e.g., the increasing speed to release, improving the productivity of the team, high test efficiency. Second, the team indicated that a set of critical success factors have a major impact on successfully carrying out its TAPI, e.g., incremental approach, the whole team effort, test tool choice and architecture, telemetry. Third, we compare the TAPI practices in the observed team with the practices described in prior literature. The team believes that the existing test automation maturity approaches should include the identified practices like the whole team effort to build a more comprehensive test automation improvement model for the software industry.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.