Efficient re-usability of action words, but better integration with the JIRA storyboard is needed
Pros and Cons
"The data table that helps in converting a single script to multiple test cases is very helpful."
"The reporting needs to be improved."
What is our primary use case?
The primary use case is tracking user stories with appropriate test coverage for them, using the BDD framework. Hiptest is mainly used for documenting all of the tests, which we can't do on JIRA.
What is most valuable?
The most valuable feature is the re-usability of action words.
The data table that helps in converting a single script to multiple test cases is very helpful.
What needs improvement?
I was trying to edit something using the raw version that it provides, but it doesn't convert it directly into a test case. Copy-pasting something directly from JIRA requires too much modification and formatting. It would be really helpful if there were seamless conversion when copy-pasting from JIRA directly into CucumberStudio.
The reporting needs to be improved.
Better integration with the JIRA storyboard is needed. By comparison, if you use Zephyr then it automatically appears on the JIRA storyboard, whereas for Hiptest, you need to externally link it. It's not visible to everyone.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Hiptest for about nine months, spanning two projects.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
This is definitely a scalable solution. At this point in time, we have five to ten concurrent users and we plan to increase our usage in the future.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Hiptest is a stable product.
How are customer service and technical support?
I have not been in contact with technical support.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I am part of a consultancy and our choice of tools depends on the client.
Prior to Hiptest, I used Zephyr for a while. One of the main reasons that our client chose to use Hiptest was pricing. Compared to Zephyr, Hiptest is much more economical. There are differences between the two products but it comes at a cost, and Hiptest provides what we want for the lower price.
What other advice do I have?
The suitability of Hiptest depends on the use cases. If you want to document manual test cases and the documentation should be as a programming concept, then you should use it. You can re-use test cases and you can also generate multiple tests from the dataset.
My advice for anybody who is implementing a BDD automation framework is to write the feature files in Hiptest, which will help in designing your automation scripts.
I would rate this solution a six out of ten.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.