Show only the non executed test cases in next build
Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2011 5:43 pm
I have a unique issue with testlink and haven't been able to find help in the user manuals or other threads.
Our company uses an Agile software life cycle model. So test cases run against a particular build need not be run again for the next build release as there is no new code added to an existing feature.
When i add a test case to a test plan, it will show against all builds. There is no way to assign it only to a particular build number
When test cases are assigned to a certain build and you have already passed or failed it, you can still see the same test case when you are executing the test plan for the next build; but it will show up as "not run" by default.
1) How can I configure testlink so that i can only see the test cases that have not been executed in the previous build or that have been failed so I can re-run it. If it already passed then It should not show up in my list.
OR
2) Can the result of the test case run in a particular build be copied to the next build only if it is marked as 'PASS' ?
This would save us a lot of time
Our company uses an Agile software life cycle model. So test cases run against a particular build need not be run again for the next build release as there is no new code added to an existing feature.
When i add a test case to a test plan, it will show against all builds. There is no way to assign it only to a particular build number
When test cases are assigned to a certain build and you have already passed or failed it, you can still see the same test case when you are executing the test plan for the next build; but it will show up as "not run" by default.
1) How can I configure testlink so that i can only see the test cases that have not been executed in the previous build or that have been failed so I can re-run it. If it already passed then It should not show up in my list.
OR
2) Can the result of the test case run in a particular build be copied to the next build only if it is marked as 'PASS' ?
This would save us a lot of time