Flosum is a downgrade for sure and I do not recommend it. Gearset is an upgrade and my preferred solution. Gearset has simplified the deployment path and makes it very easy to move between Salesforce instances. If there are any difficulties with Gearset they also have the best …
There are tools such as ANT migration tool or using sfdx but Copado makes the deployments super simple. If a user is not that technically strong still he can use Copado and deploy the changes in a few clicks. Copado provides a complete package of maintaining the development and …
When we compared Selenium to Saucelabs, [we found that] both have their own set of advantages but [preferred] Selenium [in the end]. [With] Selenium we have a uniform setup in place to test both the framework and grid which makes it preferable over Saucelabs. [The] test …
At the time of adoption, there were not many other alternatives that were even close to being competitive when it comes to browser testing. As far as I know now to this day, there is still little competition to Selenium for what it does. Any other browser-based testing still …
Customers are always spending less cost on tools and prefer open-source tools which leverage all applications Can be tailored your framework in selenium according to application Moreover CI/CD pipeline is easy in selenium compared to other tools Can be built custom test …
The main Selenium usage is in the security field. Selenium drives the web application and let ZAP test some piece of software and UI in order to find security issues. Is Jenkins in charge to run it and manage reports? For the reporting, we tried many solutions, including …
Open sourced and free: Multiple language support: The community: Wide plugin support: Easy installation and intuitive usage: Cross-browser support: Remote testing: Multiple testing and parallel testing execution:
The main reason I prefer Selenium is because it has a fairly common user community and because it is open source, it works on many platforms (Windows, Linux, IOS) without any problems. In addition, it gives us a lot of options for writing functional tests. For errors that we …
Since it is an open-source testing tool, there is no licensing cost involved. Selenium is a cross-platform tool that supports cross-browser testing. To manage and report test cases Selenium can be easily integrated with frameworks like JUnit, TestNG.
We have looked at other options, but none are open source like Selenium and easily plug able into different web applications. Selenium does not cost anything, and although you don't get support for it, there are many technical forums our there that provide troubleshooting if …
The first obvious thing is Selenium, an open-source tool, and it has a wide-open community for support. Well, on the other hand, Silk Test is a paid tool. With the combination of different tools in the market, we can build a solution for Web and Mobile based automation using …
UFT is a paid tool from microfocus and able to automated alomsts all platforms but there is Fee for licensed versions software. TOSCA is also a paid tool from Tricentis which does not require coding skills from tester and implements mode based automation. where as selenium is …
TestComplete is more like an enterprise automation testing tool, that consists of many built-in functions. The license is rather expensive https://smartbear.com/product/testcomplete/pricing/. TestComplete's user community is not as large as Selenium user. Smartbear's …
We use both the products in our work. Mostly we avoid Selenium because we have replaced that half of the work with RPA, which works faster than Selenium and with less brainstorming. Some of our work can only be done with Selenium, while some of our work can work faster with RPA.
All alternatives are not listed here (like QTP), but Selenium beats all of them because it's free, there are tons of guides and tutorials on the internet, and there are lots of extra libraries that use Selenium.
We were considering HP QTP against Selenium. but we chose Selenium because of the following reasons: 1. Selenium is more widely used and has more online support community
Ghost Inspector, a cloud-based automated web app testing tool, used for recording and playback, a lot like Selenium IDE. Ghost Inspector provides Google Chrome and Firefox plugins to record browser actions and allows users to save the tests on their cloud platform. It allows …
Very well suited if there are 3+ developers in the team. Very easy to maintain individual sandboxes and connect it to the pipeline. With just few clicks, it will create its git branches on its own and syncs with the sandboxes. Very helpful and time saving. might be expensive for small teams
When you have to test the UI and how it behaves when certain actions are performed, you need something that can automate the browsers. This is where Selenium comes to the rescue. If you have to test APIs and not the frontend (UI), I would recommend going with other libraries that support HTTP Requests. Selenium is good only when you have no choice but to run the steps on a browser.
For data migration, they can increase the limitations
The table of components in the build section can be improved
Hard to understand how to destructive changes. Sometimes facing issued after deleting the field or component that need to be deleted with destructive changes
Recognize Adobe Flash and MS Silver Light elements without additional help
Detect and locate Java applets ingredients
Having the "Wait-till-Displayed" or "Wait-till-Present" as a built in Web Driver function instead of requirement for writing loops and defining expliccit wait, visiblewait, invisiblewait, etc.
We love this product mainly because of its high customization abilities and the ease of use. Moreover, its free and can be learned easily through online communities and videos. The tests are more consistent and reliable as compared to Manual tests. It has enabled us to test a large number of features all in one go, which would have impossible through manual tests. The reports generated at the end of the tests are really helpful for the QA and the development teams to get a fair view of the application.
very good user interface. It has reduced tons of manual efforts for the developers. Very easy to validate the release work. Easy to club multiple stories into one deployment. We can integrate Copado with our JIRA and all the PR’s are visible under the user story on JIRA board. But this can be overwhelming for beginners
As I mentioned earlier, the reason I use Selenium is because there is a fairly widespread community of users, and user support services are at a good level. because the application is open source, it works on many platforms (Windows, Linux, IOS) without any problems. In addition, it gives us a lot of options for writing functional tests. For errors that we receive through the application, we can easily find the reasons for errors in the forums.
Selenium does not have technical support available easily. You have to go through forums to get the information you need. However, there are excellent forums out there that make it easy to troubleshoot. The open-source flexibility makes it difficult to have dedicated support.
We did everything we needed to use it. Now we can execute our tests on different operational systems and browsers running few tests simultaneously. We also implemented Appium framework to execute our tests on mobile devices, such as iPhones, iPads, Android phones and tablets. We use SauceLabs for our test execution and Jenkins for continuous integration.
There are tools such as ANT migration tool or using sfdx but Copado makes the deployments super simple. If a user is not that technically strong still he can use Copado and deploy the changes in a few clicks. Copado provides a complete package of maintaining the development and repositories in a common platform. There are pipelines that you can set that changes will move from which org to the final org in a very organized manner. We can perform static code analysis at the time of deployment of the changes and we have to clear those if we need to deploy the changes. Creating pull requests is super easy and can be managed by Copado itself. Overall a superb managed package for deployment in Salesforce.
At the time of adoption, there were not many other alternatives that were even close to being competitive when it comes to browser testing. As far as I know now to this day, there is still little competition to Selenium for what it does. Any other browser-based testing still utilises Selenium to interact with the browser.
It has reduced the efforts to create package.xml manually and deploy the changes
Another positive impact is that we can track the commits to which org they have reached in an organized way and we don't need to maintain them separately
For setting Copado it take a lot of time and training is required for the complete setup which is time-consuming
Generation of detailed finding reports helped in cost savings in regard to direct labor.
Quality Assurance technicians found value in repeating mundane duties that they perform daily. It saved mental energy due to the automation process.
The value was established in high volume usage in setting up meetings as well as new accounts with A/B testing. Also merely cleaning up old test documents by evaluating them and organization or deletion.