In terms of improvement, SpecFlow's installation and configuration can be a bit challenging due to its flexibility as an open-source tool. While it offers a balanced flexibility, setting it up might require more effort compared to some licensed products that handle everything. However, SpecFlow is a framework, not an automation tool, so the actual automation is carried out through tools like Selenium. Despite setup complexities, the framework itself serves its purpose effectively. In future releases of SpecFlow, it would be beneficial to have some built-in methods for common actions like opening and closing browsers or implementing loops. Having predefined libraries for these functions would save automation engineers time and make the framework more user-friendly. While I'm not sure if such features already exist, they could be valuable, especially for those working on web applications. It would provide a generic and optimized solution that anyone can easily implement without worrying about performance issues.
Regarding improvement, it would be good if SpecFlow could provide chain testing, which it currently doesn't allow. Rather than doing unit testing, we could use chain testing. I cannot speak about the new features to be added or how to handle the product since I am not an expert. I know some features of the product. Some more features can be added, but I don't know if the product already has those features. It's a difficult process to speak about what can be improved in the product.
Software Quality Assurance Supervisor at a transportation company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Nov 10, 2022
There should be more integration with the application life cycle management tools, including integration with Jira and Azure DevOps. We used to write our test cases in Microsoft Azure DevOps, which were deployed on-premises. We would write test cases in a classical way and the test data within the test steps of the test case. When we have to write down the problem, we write scenarios in Gherkin and then automate them in Selenium. That said, there is no way to have traceability between the test feature files of this backflow with any work item in TFS, Azure DevOps, or in Jira. We cannot link them. While we can link the code, this feature file or this Selenium file cannot be properly linked. I'd prefer in TFS if we could be writing test cases, not in the old classical version. We should be writing in Gherkin and then automatically have it convert that Gherkin test case into SpecFlow feature files. There is room for improvement in managing the test data related to the test cases.
SpecFlow is a testing framework that supports Behaviour Driven Development (BDD). It lets us define application behavior in plain meaningful English text using a simple grammar defined by a language called Gherkin.
In terms of improvement, SpecFlow's installation and configuration can be a bit challenging due to its flexibility as an open-source tool. While it offers a balanced flexibility, setting it up might require more effort compared to some licensed products that handle everything. However, SpecFlow is a framework, not an automation tool, so the actual automation is carried out through tools like Selenium. Despite setup complexities, the framework itself serves its purpose effectively. In future releases of SpecFlow, it would be beneficial to have some built-in methods for common actions like opening and closing browsers or implementing loops. Having predefined libraries for these functions would save automation engineers time and make the framework more user-friendly. While I'm not sure if such features already exist, they could be valuable, especially for those working on web applications. It would provide a generic and optimized solution that anyone can easily implement without worrying about performance issues.
Regarding improvement, it would be good if SpecFlow could provide chain testing, which it currently doesn't allow. Rather than doing unit testing, we could use chain testing. I cannot speak about the new features to be added or how to handle the product since I am not an expert. I know some features of the product. Some more features can be added, but I don't know if the product already has those features. It's a difficult process to speak about what can be improved in the product.
There should be more integration with the application life cycle management tools, including integration with Jira and Azure DevOps. We used to write our test cases in Microsoft Azure DevOps, which were deployed on-premises. We would write test cases in a classical way and the test data within the test steps of the test case. When we have to write down the problem, we write scenarios in Gherkin and then automate them in Selenium. That said, there is no way to have traceability between the test feature files of this backflow with any work item in TFS, Azure DevOps, or in Jira. We cannot link them. While we can link the code, this feature file or this Selenium file cannot be properly linked. I'd prefer in TFS if we could be writing test cases, not in the old classical version. We should be writing in Gherkin and then automatically have it convert that Gherkin test case into SpecFlow feature files. There is room for improvement in managing the test data related to the test cases.
SpecFlow would be improved with the addition of functionality reporting, which would be really helpful for automation testing.