Q: 5
You have been asked to determine a TAS for a new release of a SUT, test should be automated
wherever. The new release will consist of 5 new interfaces and an amendment to 3 existing
interfaces. The new and amended interface will be deliver incrementally in 3 sprints, each lasting 2
weeks.
What would be the BEST Test Automation Solution (TAS) design in this scenario?
Options
Discussion
Makes sense to go with C here. Testing at both component and system levels lets you catch issues early, plus those custom hooks help when interfaces aren't ready yet. This matches Agile's early feedback goals. Pretty sure this is the best fit.
Option C is the way to go here. D looks tempting for quick starts, but it skips system-level checks which ISTQB usually expects for "best" practice. C covers both levels and supports early feedback as interfaces drop in each sprint. Pretty sure that's what they're looking for, but open if anyone reads it differently.
Option C covers both fast feedback and proper integration checks. You get component-level tests for early validation with hooks, then system-level to make sure everything fits together after. That matches Agile/ISTQB best practice for incremental releases best, I think. Open if someone sees a scenario where D would be better though.
Option C covers both fast feedback at the component level (with hooks when interfaces aren't ready) and full integration checks at the system level. That matches incremental delivery and Agile pretty well, I think. Open to other arguments if I'm missing something.
Maybe D here. It lets you start automating right away at component level with hooks, which seems fast for incremental sprints. I know it skips the integration part though, but isn't early feedback sometimes prioritized in Agile? Disagree?
I don't think D is right, it's kind of a trap since it skips the system level. C covers both levels and uses hooks for early testing, which matches what ISTQB usually looks for. C.
Why wouldn't B be better if system-level test is enough? Is there a reason both levels are needed for these interfaces?
C imo. It covers both component and system level, so you get early feedback with hooks and proper integration checks once interfaces are ready. That lines up with ISTQB's idea of "best" for incremental builds. Open to other takes though.
Its C, had something like this in a mock and C matched ISTQB's idea of "best" coverage.
D . If the goal's to get automation running ASAP each sprint, D covers component-level quick starts with hooks even if interfaces aren't ready yet. It skips system-level though, so not fully covering integration risk.
Be respectful. No spam.
