Multi-path brokered test automation execution

• US 8,856,749 B2
• Filed: 09/28/2010
• Issued: 10/07/2014
• Est. Priority Date: 09/28/2010
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Microsoft Technology Licensing LLC (Microsoft Corporation)
• Original Assignee: Microsoft Corporation
• Inventors: Makey, Kristopher A., Cavanaugh, Ryan J., Klementiev, Dmitri A., Li, Xuechun, Louvau, Scott, Maino, Eric I
• Primary Examiner(s): Rutten, James D
• Application Number:
  US12/891,823
• Publication Number:
  US 20120079457A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,470 Days
• Field of Search: 717/126
• US Class Current: 717/126
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/3688 for test execution, e.g. scheduling of test suites

Abstract

A test case can be run with actions from the test case being executed in multiple execution paths. This can be done with the aid of an action broker. For example, the broker may identify available automation implementations for the actions and use a priority list to select between available automation implementations for executing an action from the test case. The broker may also perform conversions of results of actions for use by implementations executing other actions in different execution paths, as well as passing results between implementations in different execution paths.

Claims

1. A computer-implemented method, comprising:

executing an automated computer test case that indicates a set of actions to be executed;

receiving an indication of a first action of the set of actions at an action broker, the action broker performing the following acts in response to receiving the indication of the first action;

choosing a first automation implementation to execute the first action;

sending a request to the first automation implementation to execute the first action through a first action execution path by communicating with software being tested, the execution of the first action by the first automation implementation through the first action execution path comprising using the first action execution path to request that the software being tested perform the first action; and

receiving a result from the execution of the first action by communicating with the software being tested through the first action execution path, the result from the execution of the first action being received in a format that is specific to the first action execution path; and

receiving an indication of a second action of the set of actions at the action broker, the action broker performing the following acts in response to receiving the indication of the second action;

choosing a second automation implementation to execute the second action;

sending a request to the second automation implementation to execute the second action through a second action execution path that is different from the first action execution path by communicating with software being tested, the execution of the second action by the second automation implementation through the second action execution path comprising using the second action execution path to request that the software being tested perform the second action, the second action being different from the first action, and the second automation implementation being different from the first automation implementation; and

transmitting the result from the execution of the first action to the second automation implementation for use in executing the second action by communicating with the software being tested through the second action execution path, the result from the execution of the first action through the first action execution path being transmitted to the second automaton implementation in a second format that is specific to the second action execution path.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the first action execution path is a user interface execution path and the second action execution path is an application programming interface execution path.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein choosing the first automation implementation comprises:

using a priority list indicating one or more action execution paths for the first action; and

determining availability of one or more automation implementations for executing the first action through one or more action execution paths indicated by the priority list.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the first automation implementation does not rely on having an awareness of the second automation implementation and the second automation implementation does not rely on having an awareness of the first automation implementation.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the test case does not rely on having an awareness of what automation implementations are available.

6. The method of claim 1, further comprising converting the result from the execution of the first action from the format that is specific to the first action execution path to the format that is specific to the second action execution path, wherein converting the result comprises:

converting the result from the format that is specific to the first action execution path to a format that is not specific to the first action execution path or the second action execution path; and

converting the result from the format that is not specific to the first action execution path or second action execution path to the format that is specific to the second action execution path.

7. The method of claim 6, wherein the result from the execution of the first action is a first result and wherein the method further comprises receiving a second result from the execution of the second action in the format that is specific to the second action execution path.

8. The method of claim 7, wherein the method further comprises converting the second result to the format that is not specific to the first action execution path or second action execution path from the format that is specific to the second action execution path.

9. The method of claim 8, further comprising:

saving the first result in the format that is not specific to the first action execution path or second action execution path; and

saving the second result in the format that is not specific to the first action execution path or the second action execution path.

10. The method of claim 9, wherein:

the first action execution path is a user interface execution path and the second action execution path is an application programming interface execution path;

choosing the first automation implementation comprises using a priority list indicating one or more action execution paths for the first action and determining availability of one or more automation implementations for executing the first action through one or more action execution paths indicated by the priority list;

the first automation implementation does not rely on having an awareness of the second automation implementation, and the second automation implementation does not rely on having an awareness of the first automation implementation; and

the test case does not rely on having an awareness of what automation implementations are available.

11. One or more computer-readable storage media having computer-executable instructions embodied thereon that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform acts comprising:

executing an automated computer test case that indicates a set of actions to be executed;

receiving an indication of a first action of the set of actions at an action broker, the action broker performing the following acts in response to receiving the indication of the first action;

sending a request to execute the first action through a first action execution path using a first automation implementation by communicating with software being tested, the execution of the first action using the first automation implementation through the first action execution path comprising using the first action execution path to request that the software being tested perform the first action; and

receiving a result from the execution of the first action in a format that is specific to the first action execution path; and

receiving an indication of a second action of the set of actions at the action broker, the action broker performing the following acts in response to receiving the indication of the second action;

sending a request to execute the second action through a second action execution path using a second automation implementation by communicating with software being tested, the execution of the second action by the second automation implementation through the second action execution path comprising using the second action execution path to request that the software being tested perform the second action, the second action being different from the first action, the second automation implementation being different from the first automation implementation, and the second action execution path being different from the first action execution path;

converting the result from execution of the first action to a format that is specific to the second action execution path; and

passing the result from the execution of the first action to the second automation implementation to be used in executing the second action.

12. The one or more computer-readable storage media of claim 11, further comprising selecting the first automation implementation and the second automation implementation using an execution path priority list.

13. The one or more computer-readable storage media of claim 11, wherein the first automation implementation does not rely on having an awareness of the second automation implementation.

14. A computer system comprising:

at least one processor; and

memory comprising instructions stored thereon that when executed by at least one processor cause at least one processor to perform acts comprising;

executing an automated computer test case that indicates a set of actions to be executed;

receiving an indication of a first action of the set of actions at an action broker, the action broker performing the following in response to receiving the indication of the first action;

choosing a first automation implementation to execute the first action;

sending a request to the first automation implementation to execute the first action through a first action execution path by communicating with software being tested, the execution of the first action by the first automation implementation through the first action execution path comprising using the first action execution path to request that the software being tested perform the first action; and

receiving a result from the execution of the first action by communicating with the software being tested through the first action execution path, the result from the execution of the first action being received in a format that is specific to the first action execution path; and

receiving an indication of a second action of the set of actions at the action broker, the action broker performing the following in response to receiving the indication of the second action;

choosing a second automation implementation to execute the second action;

sending a request to the second automation implementation to execute the second action through a second action execution path that is different from the first action execution path by communicating with software being tested, the execution of the second action by the second automation implementation through the second action execution path comprising using the second action execution path to request that the software being tested perform the second action, the second action being different from the first action, and the second automation implementation being different from the first automation implementation; and

transmitting the result from the execution of the first action to the second automation implementation for use in executing the second action by communicating with the software being tested through the second action execution path, the result from the execution of the first action being transmitted to the second automaton implementation in a second format that is specific to the second action execution path.

15. The computer system of claim 14, wherein the first action execution path is an application programming interface execution path and the second action execution path is a user interface execution path.

16. The computer system of claim 14, wherein choosing the first automation implementation comprises:

using a priority list indicating one or more action execution paths for the first action; and

determining availability of one or more automation implementations for executing the first action through one or more action execution paths indicated by the priority list.

17. The computer system of claim 14, wherein the first automation implementation does not rely on having an awareness of the second automation implementation and the second automation implementation does not rely on having an awareness of the first automation implementation.

18. The computer system of claim 14, wherein the test case does not rely on having an awareness of what automation implementations are available.

19. The computer system of claim 14, wherein the acts further comprise converting the result from the execution of the first action from the format that is specific to the first action execution path to the format that is specific to the second action execution path, wherein converting the result comprises:

converting the result from the format that is specific to the first action execution path to a format that is not specific to the first action execution path or the second action execution path; and

converting the result from the format that is not specific to the first action execution path or second action execution path to the format that is specific to the second action execution path.

20. The computer system of claim 19, wherein the result from the execution of the first action is a first result and wherein the acts further comprise receiving a second result from the execution of the second action in the format that is specific to the second action execution path.