I can’t believe that I am the first person to survive this thought process, so I wonder if anyone can help me with this.
Current situation: developers are writing a website, they are deploying it. After deployment, the Smoke developer tests it to make sure that the deployment went smoothly.
For me this seems wrong, in essence it means that it takes two people to deploy the application; in our case, these two people are on opposite sides of the planet, and time zones come into play, causing chaos. But the fact remains: the developers know what a minimal set of tests is and can change over time (especially for part of the web service of our application). Operations, with all due respect to them (and they would say it themselves), are push buttons that need a set of instructions.
Guidance is that we document test cases, and operations follow this document for every deployment. This sounds painful, plus they can deploy different versions in different environments (in particular, UAT and Production), and each may require a different set of instructions.
In addition to this, one of our plans in the near future is an automatic daily deployment environment, so we will need to instruct the computer on how to deploy this version of our application. I would really like to add to these instructions as a smoke test application.
Now developers are better at documenting instructions for computers than for people, so the obvious solution seems to be to use a combination of nUnit (I know that these are not unit tests as such, but this is a built-in test program runner), as well as the Watin API or Selenium to take the obvious steps of the browser and access the web service and explain to the participants how to perform those unit tests. I can do it; I basically did it already.
But would it be nice if I could make this process even easier?
Operations , , nUnit, URL (, www.example.com = v3.2 test.example.com = v3.3).
, URL- zip, , - , ?
, ? ? , - , nUnit, , Fitnesse?
.NET-, - , , .NET, . , , , Windows.