08-12-2013 05:43 AM
We have been using UFT Essentials and QC Starter Edition. HP has discontinued the QC Starter Edition. This means that if we want to add UFT licenses we need to purchase additional and ore expensive QC or ALM licenses.
Since we don't use the QC requirements or bug tracking features, I'm wondering if we should just ditch QC all together and just use Test Batch Runner.
That would, of course, mean moving all our tests out of the QC database and onto the network. We might lose the ability to version-control our tests, though we don't use it now any way.
So, I wondering -- asking -- what other folks are experiencing using QTP/UFT without QC.
08-12-2013 06:19 AM
Basically UFT and ALM are separate produces that have an integration, this products have of course separate purpose.
You can purchase UFT licenses and use UFT to store modify or create GUI test or API test locally on a machine as you have mention, and use test batch runner to run a group of tests on that machine it means you don't need to purchase ALM license to use UFT from a local drive.
As you mention you will need to move all your tests out of the QC database and onto the network and you will lose the ability to version-control your tests (Important is always recommended if you work with a test from shared drive move it/them to local drive work on it/them and at the end move it to shared drive again ).
And we have ALM that works as a test administrator access the tests from different machines, versioning control, remote runs centralized storage, bug logs, server client functionality, between others.
So all depend of your needs.
To summarize, you can use UFT to works test locally without ALM.
08-13-2013 11:13 AM
Baased on past experiences the problems this could have are:
If you work the tests directly from the shared drive(not moving them to local drive)
Error during execution of the script because of network/conection issues.
Errors while saving test because of network/conection issues.
UFT don't support UNC paths.
08-16-2013 01:27 AM
Ì guess you will be using a SVN of some kind for version control right?
Then it should no be a problem, only thing is you will be missing the whole report and graph capabilities that come with QC.
My managers like it so I do too ;)
08-16-2013 08:31 AM
It all depends on your team and how you manage all test resources(scripts, test case, test plan, execution results, BPT etc...). I have experiences working with and without QC/ALM integration, I strongly recommand QC. I cannot imagine how you can manage, share all QA resource without QC if you have thousands of scripts, BPT components, and hundred of QA/SME team members.