模板
教程
环境
性能
功能
管理
改进自动化测试套件的可维护性(一)
Automated black box, GUI-level regression test tools are popular in the industry. Aclearcase/" target="_blank" >ccording to the popular mythology, people with little programming experience can use these tools to quickly create extensive test suites. The tools are (allegedly) easy to use. Maintenance of the test suites is (allegedly) not a problem. Therefore, the story goes, a development manager can save lots of money and aggravation, and can ship software sooner, by using one of these tools to replace some (or most) of those pesky testers.
自动化黑盒测试、GUI级回归测试工具在行业中被广泛应用。根据现在流行的说法，即使是只有很少的编程经验的人都能使用这些工具快速创建各种测试套件。按照这种说法，这些工具易于使用，并且连测试套件的维护也不成问题。因此，一位开发部经理很自然地用这些工具之一去替代一些(或很多)麻烦的测试人员，这样既省心又省钱，还能快速发布软件。
These myths are spread by tool vendors, by executives who don’t understand testing, and even by testers and test managers who should (and sometimes do) know better.
以上说法被工具提供商和不懂测试的经理到处散布，甚至还包括那些应该对测试有更多了解的测试人员和测试经理们。
Some companies have enjoyed success with these tools, but several companies have failed to use these tools effectively.
事实上，一些公司成功地使用了这些工具，而另一些公司则没能有效地利用它们。
In February, thirteen experienced software testers met at the Los Altos Workshop on Software Testing (LAWST) [2] for two days to discuss patterns of success and failure in development of maintainable black box regression test suites. Our focus was pragmatic and experience-based. We started with the recognition that many labs have developed partial solutions to automation problems. Our goal was to pool practical experience, in order to make useful progress in a relatively short time. To keep our productivity high, we worked with a seasoned facilitator (Brian Lawrence), who managed the meeting.
在二月，十三位经验丰富的软件测试工程师召开了为期两天的Los Altos Workshop on Software Testing (LAWST)会议，讨论了可维护性黑盒回归测试套件的开发过程中的成功及失败模式。讨论的焦点是实际经验。首先，我们承认很多实验室已开发出解决自动化问题的实用方法。因此，我们的目的就是把这些实际经验汇集到一起，在相对较短的时间内获得较大进展。为了保持高效，我们与主持会议的经验丰富的顾问Brian Lawrence一起工作。
These were the participants: Chris Agruss (Autodesk), Tom Arnold (ST Labs), James Bach (ST Labs), Jim Brooks (Adobe Systems, Inc.), Doug Hoffman (Software Quality Methods), Cem Kaner (kaner.com), Brian Lawrence (Coyote Valley Software Consulting), Tom Lindemuth (Adobe Systems, Inc.), Brian Marick (Testing Foundations), Noel Nyman (Microsoft), Bret Pettichord (Unison), Drew Pritsker (Pritsker Consulting), and Melora Svoboda (Electric Communities). Organizational affiliations are given for identification purposes only. Participants’ views are their own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the companies listed.
以下是与会成员：Chris Agruss (Autodesk), Tom Arnold (ST Labs), James Bach (ST Labs), Jim Brooks (Adobe Systems, Inc.), Doug Hoffman (Software Quality Methods), Cem Kaner (kaner.com), Brian Lawrence (Coyote Valley Software Consulting), Tom Lindemuth (Adobe Systems, Inc.), Brian Marick (Testing Foundations), Noel Nyman (Microsoft), Bret Pettichord (Unison), Drew Pritsker (Pritsker Consulting), and Melora Svoboda (Electric Communities). 大家只为同一个目标组织到一起。但成员们有他们自己的观点，并不一定代表整个团体的观点。
This paper integrates some highlights of that meeting with some of my other testing experiences.
本文综合了本次会议的一些重点议题以及我的一些测试经验。
What’s the Problem?
