Ability to copy project files to slave selectively
It would be nice where to be able to selectively copy project files down to the slave pc. For example, instead of copying down the whole project I would be able copy down a directory or file. This would save a lot of time being that it sometimes takes close to 5 minutes to copy down project to slave.[Poll] Do we like to preserve the Synchronization Point functionality of TestComplete?
What's New section for just released TC 14.74 contains a notification that support for the Network Suite functionality is going to be discontinued. Network Suite contains a great functionality of Synchronization Point that is essential for concurrent testing of any application (desktop/mobile/web). This functionality is going to be removed as it is a part of the Network Suite. I think that without Synchronization Point it will be impossible to do concurrent testing with TestComplete and thus would like to ask to preserve it in this or that form.
Project Suite Home Page
TestComplete has its own HomePage... Contains links to recents Projects etc.. Please ADD a way of allowing each Project Suite to have a Home Page / 'read me' page? We need to have a page that links Exectution Prerequsits, Project Jiras, Confluence pages, Test Info etc.. At the moment I've had to include a Manual Testing Project (Defaulted) and added Test Case with this info...
Integrate TestExecute into TestComplete so user can run test cases on remote PC with TestExecute.
I would like to see TestExecute integrated into TestComplete so that a user can control the TestExecute instance to run nominated test cases directly from the TestComplete Project. It would be nice to be able to nominate where test cases will be run i.e. whether to run on the current machine under TestComplete or run on a nominated PC (on the network) using the TestExecute application and license attached to the remote PC. Ideally the user would be able to nominate at an individual test case level where to execute the test with the TestComplete PC being the default option. However, even the ability to nominate entire projects to be tested under TestExecute on a remote PC from the Project Suite Test Items list would be beneficial. The expectation being that the results are captured under a consolidated Project Suite log file for analysis. This is fairly high level but happy to discuss further.Make it possible for 'Execution Plan Editor' to work with 'tags'
Hi, The request is to have the 'Execution Plan Editor' to work with Automation tests that has 'tags' on them. Currently if the "Run @tag" option is selected, the tests will run in no apparent order, ie. the 'Execution Plan Editor' feature does not work along with it. Hope that the feature request can have some priority, since it would definitely help a lot of Projects that utilize the Automation tests to run on CI/CD Pipeline. Thank you in advance.Jenkins plugin pipeline set stage status
The testcompletetest pipeline step provided with the Jenkins plugin has the actionOnWarnings and actionOnErrors options which can set the build status to unstable or failed if there are warnings or errors in the test run but there aren't options to control the stage status. This can lead to a build being unstable without having any unsuccessful stages which will make tracking down the issue harder than it needs to be from a stages view. It would be nice to have option to set the stage status as well as the build status. Something like stageActionOnErrors and stageActionOnWarnings in addition to the existing options. Having separate options for stage and build status would give you the same control as the built-in catchError step which has the buildResult and stageResult options.
Add the PCoIP protocol to the Network Suite / Distributed Testing
It would be great to add the PCoIP protocol as a connection possibility to the Network Suite/Distributed Testing. At the moment only connection options with RDP are available. Benefits of which i could think of: - Support of certain ressource analysis/monitoring tools - More "realistic" setup, as the VM would be connected over a view broker/server (though probably there won't be any large difference in performance for example) The only way to make this work until now (that I know of) is to open a session with a zero client and set the connection type in the Network Suite to "Manual", but then obviously all VM's need to run from a physical client.ID-Based License management for environment based on multiple users
1-Configure Windows VM in workgroup scenario 2-Login to VM with local user to Install Text Execute 15.61 3-Start Test Execute (License Dialog is displayed) 4-Select Get a License from On-Premise License Server 5-Type License server URL and port then click Apply 6-Test Execute is now working in the VM properly and I'm able to run test 7-Join VM to domain then reboot machine (required by Windows) 8-Login with domain user (user cannot be the same used at step 2) 9-Launch Tet Execute Actual result: License dialog is displayed again with message "Failed to connect to SmartBear server." Cannot obtain the IP address of the SmartBear server. Step 4 and 5 MUST be repeated to make TestExecute working properly. This happens because the user configured in workgroup is different by user used in domain With new version of TestExecute the configuration of License from On-Premise License Server must be done for each users used by test, this means if an environment requires test with more different users the configuration must be repeated. Also, in case the test automation create user for test purpose and then try to switching to new user to do something via test automation it doesn't work.
Add more log information on Jenkins Smartbear Plugin TestComplete Test Console Output log
Currently there it is just logged with what exe & version & parameters passed. From past experience it would be good to have following details logged too: Configured session details - Run interactive user session flag - Use active session flag - Session screen resolution (sample 2560x1440) The real facts from the Session Desktop during test execution - Is it an interactive user session? - Is an already active session used or did the test runner created a new one? - Session screen resolution (sample 1679x551 which does not match the requested one see above)
