Forum Discussion

GP's avatar
GP
New Contributor
5 years ago
Solved

Zephyr for JIRA Cloud-how to restrict the editing permission when the test execution status is PASS?

Hello to everyone!šŸ˜ƒ

 

I'm new in the Community, I hope someone could share his/her expertise with me solving this problem:
I need to avoid editing the test status field in the following cases.

 

  1. The standard testing requires that a test execution in PASS can't be transition to any other status, because the PASS status is the final one. How can I restrict the ability to edit this field when the value is PASS? Any user shouldn't edit the status field.
    (see attachment #1 and #2)

 

  1. The standard testing requires also a status N/A, that means "not applicable" in case a test case won't be processed anymore, so, I added a custom test execution status with value 'N/A'.
    The same restriction is needed here! How can I restrict the ability to edit this field when the value is N/A, a custom status?
    (see attachment #3 and #4)
  2.  

Thanks a lot!šŸ˜‰

GP

 

Zephyr for JIRA Cloud

3 Replies

Sort By
  • JagadeshMadhura's avatar
    JagadeshMadhura
    Icon for Staff rankStaff
    5 years ago
    Copy Link

    Hi,

     

    You can achieve this by enabling execution work flow, There will be 4 status in execution workflow(Todo, in-progress, done, reopen), user can change the status of the execution when execution status is in Todo state, once it is done then user cannot edit the execution status. 

     

    Once status is done, again if user want to re-execute the status of the execution then user has to re-open and execute to pass/fail and make it to done. The overall history of the execution, you can check in test execution history details

    For more details refer :
    https://zephyrdocs.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/ZFJ0400/pages/1250525216/Execution+Workflow#Required-Configuration-for-the-Execution-Workflow

    Note: If you are facing any issues please raise support ticket - https://support.smartbear.com/message/?prod=zephyr

     

    Thanks

    Jagadeesh

    • GP's avatar
      GP
      New Contributor
      5 years ago
      Copy Link

      Hi Jagadeesh,

      thanks for your reply.

       

      This not a solution, but a useful workaround I've already set and explained to the end-user.

       

      Unfortunately the execution statuses shouldn't be a simple list of options should be a configurable set of options by the Jira administrator to restrict the editing permission depending on the current status. This is the only way to avoid the end-user make a mistake in selecting a not-compliant status or forget to choose 'Done' in the workflow.

       

      The automatism is essential: any final status of the execution should be irreversible. The final status are PASS (built-in status) and 'N/A' (custom status).

       

      If the user forget to select 'Done', the execution status could be edited by anyone!


      Even if the execution history can help identifying who change the execution status and when, the process is not compliant to the standard ISTQB  and the KPI gadget becomes incongruous.
      For example, an end-user reopen a test execution and change the status from 'N/A', not applicable, to WIP, work in progress; the action is not compliant to the test management standard (N/A is a final status) and the filter that collect all opened statuses includes this execution so the gadget 'Test Execution Details' displays this execution as if the testing team is working on it while it should be count as finished, no more work needed (performance degradation is not real!).

       

      The Zephyr execution workflow is focused on the time tracking not on the process, unfortunately!

       

      This tool is missing some needed features. Hope the next releases can be better than this!

       

      Best Regards,
      GP

       

       

       

       

       

      • JagadeshMadhura's avatar
        JagadeshMadhura
        Icon for Staff rankStaff
        5 years ago
        Copy Link
        Hi GP,

        Yes I have given workaround but I have noted down your usecase and raised feature request and forwarded to product management team. Our team will review and prioritize this and will fix it in future release

        Thanks
        Jagadeesh