<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>SystemsThoughts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.systemsthoughts.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.systemsthoughts.com</link>
	<description>Software Testing, Web Development and Python</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 12:27:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Why you should never build your own test framework at work</title>
		<link>http://www.systemsthoughts.com/2011/why-you-should-never-build-your-own-test-framework-at-work/</link>
		<comments>http://www.systemsthoughts.com/2011/why-you-should-never-build-your-own-test-framework-at-work/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jul 2011 10:54:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Zhe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Thoughts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[experience]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thoughts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.systemsthoughts.com/?p=30</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week I moved parts of home-brewed automated test framework to the robot framework. It went smoother than I thought and the new framework offered more functionalities that I was hoping to implement but didn’t for the sake of time. I wonder why I chose to write my own framework in the first place, since Robot framework came out few years ago. (probably because that test framework started as an experiment at work and was in “trial” ever since) It reminds me [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last week I moved parts of home-brewed automated test framework to <a href="http://code.google.com/p/robotframework/">the robot framework</a>. It went smoother than I thought and the new framework offered more functionalities that I was hoping to implement but didn’t for the sake of time. I wonder why I chose to write my own framework in the first place, since Robot framework came out few years ago. (probably because that test framework started as an experiment at work and was in “trial” ever since)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.systemsthoughts.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Homebrew_System_2_Open.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-63" title="Homebrew_System_2_Open" src="http://www.systemsthoughts.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Homebrew_System_2_Open-300x250.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="250" /></a>It reminds me a tip in <a href="http://pragprog.com/book/prj/ship-it" target="_blank">&#8220;Ship It! A Practical Guide to Successful Software Projects&#8221;</a>: using an “off the shelf” test framework. To most of the people (including me), it seems unnecessary in the beginning to learn to use a new framework just for a simple task. If I can finish it in a few lines of code, why bother spending days pick up something from start? But what people fail to see is automated test grows. A test suite will stay with the project forever and be executed after every change (that’s why you automated it, right?). As software changes, new functionalities need to be added. A few lines become hundreds or thousands lines of code. If you are lucky like me who created their own framework, you will find most of time you spend are not adding new test cases or data into the suite, but maintaining the framework. Since the framework runs as much as the test cases, or even more, there will be plenty of bugs and issues rising up to the surface. But this wouldn’t happen if you implement your tests with well-known test framework, since there are more people maintaining and it comes far more comprehensive from start.</p>
<p>What if there is currently no frameworks that fit your requirement? The best solution is to, still, choose a popular framework and start adding the missing function to it. There are possibly other people on the planet who would like to have the same function and will use or even improve it. So you spend the same amount of time implementing, but much less time maintaining. The employer should also support this because it saves resource and money.</p>
<p>The best example is Google chromium project. As a company famous of their re-inventing wheels, they are also adopting numbers of open-source tools and frameworks. In chromium they use buildbot for automated build and test instead of making their own framework. So next time think about if you can beat the whole chromium QA team before choosing your own framework over the “off the shelf” stuff:P</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.systemsthoughts.com/2011/why-you-should-never-build-your-own-test-framework-at-work/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A simple SOAP mockup service in Python</title>
		<link>http://www.systemsthoughts.com/2011/a-simple-soap-mockup-service-in-python/</link>
		<comments>http://www.systemsthoughts.com/2011/a-simple-soap-mockup-service-in-python/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 10:37:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Zhe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Automated Test]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[python]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soap]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[test]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.systemsthoughts.com/index2.php/?p=12</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was dealing with SOAP tests a lot last month, and WireShark is little too much for simply checking a SOAP request. So I made a little script to show (not capture) the package content. It might be helpful if one needs automated SOAP testing as well. It&#8217;s very tiny (26 lines if use without Gzip) and doesn&#8217;t depend on any other modules. Source code can be found at https://bitbucket.org/zheli/soap_echo_server/. Comments are welcome here:)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was dealing with SOAP tests a lot last month, and WireShark is little too much for simply checking a SOAP request. So I made a little script to show (not capture) the package content. It might be helpful if one needs automated SOAP testing as well. It&#8217;s very tiny (26 lines if use without Gzip) and doesn&#8217;t depend on any other modules.</p>
<p>Source code can be found at <a href="https://bitbucket.org/zheli/soap_echo_server/">https://bitbucket.org/zheli/soap_echo_server/</a>. Comments are welcome here:)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.systemsthoughts.com/2011/a-simple-soap-mockup-service-in-python/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hello world!</title>
		<link>http://www.systemsthoughts.com/2011/hello-world/</link>
		<comments>http://www.systemsthoughts.com/2011/hello-world/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 08:51:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Zhe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.systemsthoughts.com/?p=1</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This my first post. All English articles will be moved from http://blog.systemsthoughts.com to here in the future.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This my first post. All English articles will be moved from <a href="http://blog.systemsthoughts.com">http://blog.systemsthoughts.com</a> to here in the future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.systemsthoughts.com/2011/hello-world/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

