ReadyAPI Feature Requests

When Smart Assertion is created property is used for some values in Valid Value column in Smart Assertion (ReadyAPI v3.9.2). Some values might changed in response so it is nice to use "Populate from Received Data". But it changes all values from response. It would be nice that there would be possibility to save/leave not changed properties. ... View more

Can SmartBear add a linter to ReadyAPI? I would like to make ReadyAPI check the quality of a user's work (test cases and scripts), i.e. perform linting. The work can be checked as the user is typing it or when the user requests for it. For example, ReadyAPI should complain when the user does not write a description for a test case, the user's groovy code has known bad practices etc. Some rules can be ignored by the user, but some should be mandatory. I'd also like to generate a report of all the issues in a test case/script to see if people ignored the complains and did not follow best practices. Keywords - Linting, Linter, Code Analysis.   PS - I asked this as a question also over here https://community.smartbear.com/t5/API-Functional-Security-Testing/Linting-or-automatic-code-checking-in-ReadyAPI/m-p/208439#M47532   ... View more

Hello, everyone! Given the breakthrough and popularity of Apple's new silicon (M1), I think there should be an optimized version of ReadyAPI for this silicon, as it will obviously run faster than using Rosetta 2. Thanks! ... View more

Prior to this release test step assertions were always allowed to minimize, now it is not.    I have groovy scripts and SOAP Request/Response xml that can be 100's or 10,000's of lines.  *  When my SOAP test step first opens up there is only 10 lines at a time that can display.  *  When I minimize the Assertion area I can get it to 15.     Suggestions: *  To collapse it on the right side so we can obtain the length of the screen. *  Return it to allow the Assertions to collapse out of the way.   Related suggestions: *  For those of us that utilize ReadyAPI with Groovy and JDBC's more, it would be good to have better work area real estate when you push out these changes. *  Also if a portrait screen was more user friendly I would use that more, unfortunately my home version (thanks to Covid) my portable monitor doesn't allow good screen resolutions.   *  Collapsing the left side and the bottom would be a fantastic option.   Thank you!   ... View more

in version 3.9.0 there is a smartAssertion created that deprecates the HTTP assertions. As all of my testcases (a huge amount) have this assertion I'm not going to adapt them manually as this will take a huge effort to do so. No clue why Smartbear has deleted this assertion as I think quasi all of the testers are using this!? Please, re-install the HTTP assertions! ... View more

In Ready API, we can import API definition directly from SwaggerHub. When in a new version is available, I can't use the update definition feature to load the openAPi specs from Swaggerhub. ... View more

With the release of ReadyApi 2.0 GetData behavior was changed and we are NOT impressed.    Font size is set and unchangeable Column width is set and unchangeable   This means that ANY TestSuite, TestCase etc. with names longer than 16 characters all look a like, making it impossible to be efficient as new functionality forces us to MouseOver to be able to find the correct TestCase name.   Please at least make the GetData Columns resiazeable, so we can see the names of our TestSuites and TestCases again!   See attached file. ... View more

Current Change: In ReadyAPI 2.5.0, the soap and rest request run button, and for test steps Add Assertion button were tweaked to make them more prominent (they now include text labels). This itself is fine. However, as part of this change the position of the buttons was also moved.  They're now on the right-side of the destination URI instead of the left side.   Request: Please put the buttons back to the left-hand side of the URI.   Reasoning for it's usefulness: 1. It's inconsistent design. The run button was ONLY moved to the right side for request test steps and operations. However, test cases, test suites, and JDBC test steps all still have the play button on the left-hand side.  This breaks the consistency of the run button placement--people will now sometimes have to go to the left to run, and sometimes go to the right, all depending on what's being run.   2. Long-term users are also extremely used to the run button being on the left side, so it's a nuisance to have to keep moving over to the right side now to use it, when we habbitually go to the left-hand side first.   3. There was no need to move the buttons to the right--it didn't help increase the visibility of the buttons, and it doesn't provide any new benefits.   4. It also breaks certain usage patterns where I sometimes open a test request on a left pane, then one or two other validiton checks to the right of that, and they hit the run buttons from left to right while I'm trouble-shooting something. This works nicely when all buttons are placed on the left-hand side of their tabs. ... View more

Our organization would benefit greatly from integration with Allure Reporting. It would be great if SoapUi could allow for annotations, steps and links to be added directly in test case requests/steps that would then output the appropriate xml that generates the beautiful and detailed allure reports.    http://allure.qatools.ru/ ... View more

Enhancement Request: It would be useful if we add an extra "Suite Group", or "Suite Categories" level in the SoapUI test case hierarchy for organizing test suites. This would be a parent of Test Suite. This way you could collapse.expand categories of test suites. This should be an optional level, so that those who just want test suites wouldn't need to have the extra layer of categories.   Reasoning for it's usefulness: Currently, in each project, we organize tests by test suite, and test case. There is no broader category than test suite.  In a situation where you have multiple APIs that while might mostly be independent, but that do also have interaction with each other, it would be handy to have them all be in a single project.   However, if each API itself needs several test suites for testing it, then having multiple APIs in a single project isn't great for organizing your test suites, since they're all in a flat structure at the test suite level.  That's one reason for keeping the APIs in different projects, so that you can expand only the test suites for the given API, without seeing a bit list of all the other API's test suites.   The most common usage for Suite Groups/Categories would likely be to organize test suites by each API in the project, but their would certainly be other categories that people would come up with. ... View more

Testrunner.sh currently supports the -T option, which allows users to specify which tagged test cases they want to run. However, there is not a flag that allows the user to specify which tags to ignore in your test run.   For example, if I tagged test cases with "prototype" I could run only those tests with that specific tag using -T"TestCase prototype". However, if I wanted to run all tests but exclude the prototype tags I currently don't have the ability to do that. Maybe a new tag, or addition of ! into the flag would work?   Ex: -T"TestCase !prototype" <----- where ! prefix specifies not to run tests with prototype flag     This could even be expanded further where the -T option would support both inclusive and exclusive tags. Ex: -T"TestCase prototype !ignorethese" <---- run all tests that have the prototype flag, but don't run those that have ignorethese flag ... View more

Current behaviour: 1) In the additional request headers tab of a SOAP/REST test step I select multiple headers (the selected headers visually are selected by having the color blue = OK).  2) I click on the delete bin button. 3) Only the first header is deleted. Expected behaviour: ALL of the selected headers should be deleted. If a use wants to delete 10 headers he now has to manually select them and delete them one-by-one. This is frustrating.   Note: this issue has been around for ages.  Additionally: We (luckily) can select and copy the headers properly by doing a select and then Ctrl+C. The feature of copy-pasting request headers might not be really visible in the UI (e.g. there is no "copy" button), but I am very grateful this is possible through Ctrl+C. Might be wise to visually allow this to? ... View more

I'm using ReadyAPI 2.5.0. Please implement a feature where I can search for text pieces accross all test steps, regardless their types. Right now I can do this by searching through the xml project files, but it's clearly not the best (or most friendly) option. ... View more

  It will be nice to have the option to set generic assertion for all the API request in the project , or to select some of the APEs should have the same assertion .     meaning of generic assertion - The user will create the assertion and will have the option to set it the over API requests. Motivation - I have hundreds of API requests, more then have of them have the same assertion ,so i need to copy paste them one by one. ... View more

Hello, Just the way we have integration of Ready API to Zephyr cloud, Can we have the same integration wtih Zephyr Server too ? My organisation uses Zephyr server and we are very eagerly looking for the integration of zephyr with Ready API so that once Ready API project runs, Mapped zephyr test cases gets executed. Currently i see that we have that in Zephyr cloud and not on zephyr server. Can we have it on Zephyr server too. Thanks. We have a case 00397737 on the same. ... View more

There must be a feature by which i can re-order my Test Steps or Test Cases or Test Suites at once, right now i am able to re-order one by one and it takes lot of time if i have huge number of test-cases. ... View more

Any clone/move renames testcases/suites/steps to 'Copy of'. That is unnecessary if moved to a location, where no copies of them exists. Why not let me clone one or more  teststeps, select a destination, and THEN check if one with the same name exists, and if it does, then let me decide on the name?   It is especially annoying when cloning multiple objects, as you can't rename these before the cloning. And it gets even more annoying when you clone TestCases, as the new clone's file on the disk is then named 'Copy of'... ' and if you do not want mismatch between the TC name in ReadyAPi and on the disk (relevant when commiting to GitHub), you then have to manually rename the files on the disk afterwards. ... View more

Hi,  There is no possibility currently to integrate ReadyAPI and Zephyr Squad on JIRA Server.  In this documentation, it is mentioned that only Zephyr Squad Cloud is supported.  It would be nice to have it for Zephyr Squad on Jira Server ... View more

Would be helpful & efficient if there was a simpler way to compare datasources, especially when working with large data sets where multiple calls to db/json wouldnt be practical.    Scenario - Taking the results of a jdbc query & putting it into a datasource file. Then taking the results of a json query & putting that into a datasource file. Now compare the 2 datasource files to make sure the values match. ... View more