Gherkin DSL for testcase description and automation

[David C]

Hi,

Are there any tools available that can parse the Cucumber/Gherkin DSL
code and produce the more human readable list oriented test cases?  It
sounds like it should be theoritically possible to write the test
cases in Gherkin code and then produce both the automated test cases
and the manual test cases.

David

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Руаньяк <roignac at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I guess, this idea will be a good decision for a small project on its
> early days of development - in that case, all features can easily be
> defined and QA will have some scenarios to test.
>
> As Gema and Charlie have shown, this will not work for manual
> testcases for Ubuntu on the whole. However, Gherkin scenarios seem to
> be a better choice for a small project than python unittests,
> especially for newcomers.
>
> Thanks everyone for such a productive discussion, I hope some people
> have learned about basic possibilities of BDD and will use it for some
> projects (maybe, for Mago automation?)
> --
> Vadim Rutkovsky
>
> 2011/12/10 Alex Lourie <djay.il at gmail.com>:
>> First, let me just say wow. Thank you roignac for the idea; Gema, Brandon
>> and Charlie for comments. This is a great discussion, and I would like to
>> have much more of these in the future.
>>
>> To sum up what we have now:
>>
>> Roignac - Thanks a lot!! I think that this is a viable idea on its own, and
>> we may continue discussing it in some form.
>> Others (including Gema, Brendan, Charlie and myself) are not very fond of
>> it. Not because of its merit, but because we feel it will make the work
>> harder for manual testers.
>>
>> I would currently recommend the following course of action: continue with
>> the rewriting test cases in ISTQB format, and, maybe, add future plans for
>> exploring the possibilities for automation of those test cases, including
>> Gherking format. I don't think that it's necessarily mutually exclusive to
>> have both manual and automatic test cases. But I believe that we need to
>> concentrate on just one format currently (I prefer the one which is easier
>> for manual testers), and look for the possible expansions later.
>>
>> Great to have this discussion, it's refreshing after long period of low
>> traffic in QA.
>>
>> Thanks all.
>>
>> --
>> Alex Lourie
>>
>> --
>> Ubuntu-qa mailing list
>> Ubuntu-qa at lists.ubuntu.com
>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-qa
>>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-qa mailing list
> Ubuntu-qa at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-qa