HP ALM Online Training
http://cheyat.com/qa/hp-alm-onli
ne-training-tutorials
ALM Work Flow Requirement through
Deployment
Predictability
Heightened repeatability
Improved quality
Ready accommodation of
change
Why Testing
Why Test management
How do I know my release readiness
How do I manage my requirements
How do I track my test coverage
How do I monitor my Release progress
How do I assess the severity and priority of my defects
How do I base line my test artifacts
Why Test Management Tools
Test management is the practice of organizing and
controlling the process and artifacts required for the
testing effort.
Traditional tools
used for test
management
include:
Pen and paper
Word processors
Spreadsheets
Sharing in Drives (J:/)
Emails
Test Management Recommendations
Start test management activities early
Test iteratively
Reuse test artifacts
Utilize requirements-based testing
Leverage remote testing resources
End to End Traceability of Release requirements
Defining and enforcing a flexible testing process
Coordinate and integrate with the rest of development
Communicate status
Focus on goals and results
Automate to save time
Benefits
ALM Stakeholders
Project
Track release progress
Managers
Visibility into key project milestones
Full trending analysis and insight into
application projects
Clearly communicate to all stakeholders
Development
Improve developer efficiency
Team
Dashboar
d
Defect
Dashboard and Analysis
View
Release
Requirement
Dashboard and Analysis
View
Release
Requirement
Business
Define
Analysts
and track multiple requirement types
Bi-directional traceability from requirements to
requirements, tests and defects
Leverage existing assets in MS Word
Testing Team
Create test cases to adequately test the requirements
Consistent defect management process
across all projects and initiatives
Manage and control execution of manual and
automated tests
Integrated into developers IDE
Create defects from manually or directly from the
execution of manual and automated tests
Dashboard and Analysis
View
Release
Requirement
Testing
Defect 8
HP ALM Login Entities
Requirements Module
Domain
Projects
Root Folder
AFG_Projects
_ All
<LOB>_<Pr
oject
ID>_<Projec
t Name>
Project
Name
AFG_ RFC_
All
<LOB>_<RF
Cs>_<Year>
RFC_LOB_20
15
Jan
Sub Folder
Req 1
Test Plan/Test Lab module
Root Folder
Project A
RFC_LOB_20
15
RFC N
Bug
Fix_LOB_015
Jan
Bug
Fix_LOB_015
Bug Fix 1
Bug Fix N
Bug Fix 1
Dec
Bug Fix N
Reporting
Defects
Reporting
Test case N
Defects
Reporting
Regression
Test case N
Dec
<LOB>_<Bug
Fix&
Routine>_<Ye
ar>
Defects
Test case 1
Regression
Test case 1
RFC N
RFC 1
AFG_Bug
Fix
&Routine_
All
Test case 1
Reporting
module
Test case N
Req N
RFC 1
Test Case
Defects
module
Test case 1
Test case N
Regression
Test case 1
Regression
Test case N
Defects
Reporting
Testing Process An Overview (SOLMAN HP
ALM)
Business Blueprints
Test Planning
Test Execution
Automation Testing
HP ALM 12
SOLMAN
Business
Processes
Test Objects
Requiremen
ts
Test Results to
SOLMAN
Defects Module
Defects to
process in
SOLMAN
Manual Feed or
Import from Excel
Req/Test cases
Test
Requirements
Test Cases
Test sets to run
Test Results
Defects
SAP TAO
Component based
Automation
HP UFT
Test Automation Tool
HP Sprinter
Manual Testing
Testing Process Details (SOLMAN HP ALM)
Requirements Module
1. The Requirements can be loaded to HP ALM in any of the following three ways
Import are Export the business blueprint and test objects from SOLMAN SOLAR02
Note: Only the Business Processes/scenarios that has test object or transactions assigned to it can be export or
import to HP ALM
Capture the functional requirements in the defined excel spreadsheet and import the same to HP ALM
Create the required folder tree and enter requirements into that based on the functional requirements document
2. Once the Requirements are imported to the HP ALM then we can update/delete the requirement on accessing to the
respective requirement
Testing Process Details (SOLMAN HP ALM)
contd.
Test Plan Module
1. The test cases can be loaded to HP ALM in any of the following two ways
Directly enter the test cases and define the test steps in the Test plan module
Write the test cases in the defined excel spreadsheet and import the same to HP ALM test plan module
2. Each test case will be mapped to the corresponding requirements by editing the test case
Test Lab Module
3. The corresponding test cases need to be mapped pull to the Test lab module as a Test set for the test execution
4. These test case need to be executed either Manually or Automated run for the automated cases.
5. The test results must be transferred to SOLMAN SOLAR01/SOLAR02
Testing Process Details (SOLMAN HP ALM)
contd.
Defects Module
1. During the test execution the defects can be logged when the testing scenario is fail to meet the expected result
2. Defects falling under two types:
1. Defect: It is a regular defect that is been identified as to be processed in the HP ALM only by both Testing an
Development team and it goes though the defect lifecycle process in ALM
2. SAP related Defect: It is a defect that is been identified as to be processed in the SOLMAN by the development
team and it goes through the defect lifecycle process in SOLMAN (Defect Fix) and ALM (Defect logging, resetting
and Closing )
These can be viewed in the CRM_DNO_MONITOR or SM_WORKCENTER or CRM_ORDER transactions
codes in SOLMAN
HP ALM
Assign
responsibili
ty to SAP
SOLMAN
New
Forwarded
New
Received from
HPQC
Fixed
Proposed Solution
Closed
Confirmed
Defect Workflow
HP ALM Implementation Case Study
Client
Client Profile
Profile
Project
Project Background
Background
Client is one of the largest company that
offers a comprehensive array of financial
services to retail and institutional clients,
which includes annuities, retirement plans,
life insurance, mutual funds, managed
accounts, alternative investments, direct
banking,
institutional
investment
management,
employee
benefits,
and
financial planning.
Client
Client Requirements
Requirements
The client was looking to implement HP ALM
to address the following:
The Client wanted to assure quality with systematic automation
testing conducted over the course of one year before rolling out.
This massive project carried with it significant risk, as errors and
downtime could erode customer trust or even lead to business
losses.
Cognizant
Cognizant Solution
Solution Approach
Approach
Cognizant
focused
on
deploying
integratedQuality
management across the application lifecycle to focus and
Manage and create traceability between
requirements, tests artifacts and defects
prioritize testing resources at all phases and find and manage
Standardize process across application
lifecycle
By taking a systematic, risk-based, managed approach to
Facilitate
collaboration
communication
between
distributed teams
and
multiple,
defects earlier in the lifecycle when they are less costly to fix.
quality throughout the lifecycle, the result would lead to a fewer
issues in production and faster time to delivery.
The implementation allowed the Clients to prioritize testing
Manage and execute automated testing
based on risk. And with quality metrics and centralized
Make informed go/no go decisions
reporting, they were able to make informed decisions about
Provide a scalable architecture
application releases.
HP ALM Implementation Case Study
Benefits
Benefits achieved
achieved using
using HP
HP ALM
ALM
Reduced cost through centralized management and enforcement of
consistent workflows and processes
Increased efficiency by reducing duplication of effort and sharing best
practices
Increased visibility to quality status, requirement coverage and defect
trends in aggregate across projects and initiatives
Achieved significant savings by tracking key metrics against project
milestones
within
Project Planning and Tracking of HP Application
Benefits
gain
from
Benefits
gain
from
Management
ALM
ALM
Reduced cost through centralized management
and enforcement of consistent workflows and
processes
Reduced cost and increased efficiency
by reducing duplication of effort and
sharing best practices
Increased visibility to quality status,
requirement coverage and defect trends in
aggregate across projects and initiatives
Others
Business
Business Benefits
Benefits achieved
achieved
The
Client
was
able
to
minimize
business risk in this important project.
A quality assurance process has been
created for building next generation
systems.
Quantitative measures of IT quality and
performance have been established to
support increased business efficiency
Top
Top New
New Features
Features in
in
ALM
ALM
Project Planning & Tracking
Requirements Templates
Project/Template Reports
Traceability Matrix
Embedded Web Scorecards &
Graphs
Business Process Modeling
Integration
Test Configurations
Defect Categories
Category
Defect
Issue
New Req
Description
When a defect is logged its categorized as Defect by default. It states that the defect is considered to be
analyzed and fixed for the current release
When a defect is identified and after reviewing ,it has few dependencies to be verified like test data, test
steps to be carried etc. hence the defect will be categorized as Issue
When a defect is logged in which the test carried to related to that defect is not mention in the requirement.
Then the defect is considered as a New Req and it goes through the Change request process as AFG we
following today.
Defect Statuses & Descriptions
Status
Responsibility
Target Owner
New
Tester
Test Lead
Description
Tester/Business tester creates a defect during testing; the initial status of the defect will be in New status.
The New status defect will be assigned to Test Lea d for the Defect triage or analysis.
Pending
Rejected
Test Lead
Test Lead
Rejected
Test Lead
Test Lead
Deferred
Test Lead
Test Lead
Assigned
Test Lead
Functional/ DEV team
During defect meeting when the defect analysis results in to that the defect is not a valid one then test lead
changes the defect to Pending Reject status for the further discussion with the Functional team or Business
team.
Test lead will change the status of the defect to Rejected in following conditions:
Defect analysis results in to the decision that the system works as expected and its an invalid defect
Tester's misunderstanding of requirements or test scripts.
Tester mistakenly logged a duplicate defect that was already raised, in case of duplicate defect; the new one is
marked as Rejected and if any useful information from the new defect is copied over to the old defect.
Test Lead will Defer a defect when it is analyzed and
Not In-scope on functionality
Not in current scope but in future releases.
When these defects are need to be picked up and assign in future release then the test lead can change the
defect status to Assigned
Req. for info
Functional/DEV
team
Test Lead
Fixed
Functional/ DEV
team
Test Lead
Retest
Test Lead
Tester
Reopen
Tester
Functional/ DEV team
Successfully
Tested
Tester
Test Lead
Closed
Test Lead
NA
When a New defect is created by tester and it is considered as a valid defect, then the Test lead will assign to
the concern team (developer/Functional SME) and then the status will be changed to Assigned.
New defects will be picked first during the defect triage to decide the assignment.
Once the Defect is assigned to the Functional SME or the developer then they will look the defect and if any
clarification required on the defect then the clarification can be mentioned in defect comments and assign
back to the tester/test lead as "Req. for info".
Test Lead will consult tester and provide the necessary details for the defect and assign back to the same
Functional or Developer
After the defect is fixed, the status is changed to Fixed by Functional SME/Developer and assigned to Test lead for
the verification to proceed further for the retest
Once the test lead confirms that fixes are ready to test then changes the defect status to Retest and assigned to
the tester who is responsible for retest.
When the tester retest the defect and confirms that the fix does not resolve the defect completely, then changes
the status to Reopen and assign back the functional or development team.
When the tester retest the defect and confirms that the fix has worked fine, then defect the changes status to
Successfully Tested which will assign to test lead
Test lead will verify the Successfully tested defects and changes the status to Closed
Any new issues identified during retest should be created as a new defect rather than reopening the current defect.
Defect Priority levels
Priority is an outcome of subjective evaluation of how important an issue to the business. Other tasks in the queue and schedule
are factors that may impact the decision of prioritizing the Defect. It is relative, it shifts, and it is always a business decision.
Initial value for priority field will be set by the tester who creates the defects based on testing impact. During defect triage
meeting it business re-evaluates and updates the value, if needed.
DEV/business will participate in the defect triage meeting during the Testing (Functional/SIT/Regression) done by QA and will
assign / change the priority to new defects based on business impact.
Priority
Level
Business Impact
Testing Impact
P1
This has severe impact to the customer and continuing to
operate may not be possible. This must be fixed
immediately.
Defect is a blocking issue. The defect would impact the completion of testing
iteration if not resolved, and any testing cannot proceed until this defect is resolved
P2
This is major impact to the customer but does not halt
operations. This must be fixed as soon as possible and
before the release of the current version in development.
Defect is severe. This impacts the general behavior of the application. A workaround
may exist but its use is unsatisfactory. Test cases will be blocked due to this defect.
P3
This has major impact to the customer. The problem should
be addressed and fixed with the current version release if
time permits, or a patch to the release issued, if possible.
The failure impacts non-critical aspects of the system, behavior of functionality
under specific conditions. During testing this will result in test case failure, but will
not block the execution of the other test cases.
P4
This has minor impact to the customer. The flaw is usually
cosmetic to the customer in nature and only needs to be
fixed when there is sufficient time.
Cosmetic problem. During testing this will result in test case failure, but will not
block the execution of the other test cases.
Reports and Graphs
Defect Summary Report <as on date>
120
Test Summary Report <as on date>
20
10
100
10
10
8
60
12
21
40
12
20
Deferred
21
10
80
Rejected
23
10
8
23
21
10
8
21
18
10
5
16
Closed
14
UT
SIT
UAT
Retest
12
Fixed
10
Assigned
New
No Run
Blocked
0
SIT
Fail
Pass
Not Completed
UT
18
UAT
Lab