Skip test execution during scheduled maintenance windows
Whenever maintenance is conducted/performed on a recurring schedule, tests running during this window fail and generate unnecessary noise/alerts. Please add an ability to define specific time windows during which test execution is paused or suppressed/skipped. This configuration should be available at the individual test level. One-time maintenance windows should be configurable at project level.
Michał Muszyński 13 days ago
Skip test execution during scheduled maintenance windows
Whenever maintenance is conducted/performed on a recurring schedule, tests running during this window fail and generate unnecessary noise/alerts. Please add an ability to define specific time windows during which test execution is paused or suppressed/skipped. This configuration should be available at the individual test level. One-time maintenance windows should be configurable at project level.
Michał Muszyński 13 days ago
Skip test conditionally, based on element presence
During unplanned maintenance many applications display a maintenance popup. No mechanism currently exists to recognize that, in result scheduled tests execute as usual, fail, and send error alerts. Workarounds using custom JS mark the test as "Failed" rather than "Skipped," which still triggers unwanted notifications. Please add an assertion type that will prematurely end a test run on a condition; if a condition is met, the test should immediately terminate with “Skipped” status, instead of failed. An addition to skip test execution with code would also be useful.
Michał Muszyński 13 days ago
Skip test conditionally, based on element presence
During unplanned maintenance many applications display a maintenance popup. No mechanism currently exists to recognize that, in result scheduled tests execute as usual, fail, and send error alerts. Workarounds using custom JS mark the test as "Failed" rather than "Skipped," which still triggers unwanted notifications. Please add an assertion type that will prematurely end a test run on a condition; if a condition is met, the test should immediately terminate with “Skipped” status, instead of failed. An addition to skip test execution with code would also be useful.
Michał Muszyński 13 days ago
Bulk management for Components
Currently, when a user needs to remove a component, they cannot apply this change to multiple associated tests simultaneously. They must open each test individually to make the update. Please enable users to view all tests that contain a specific component, allowing them to select a subset of tests, that could be actioned to remove/add/unlink the component.
Michał Muszyński 13 days ago
Bulk management for Components
Currently, when a user needs to remove a component, they cannot apply this change to multiple associated tests simultaneously. They must open each test individually to make the update. Please enable users to view all tests that contain a specific component, allowing them to select a subset of tests, that could be actioned to remove/add/unlink the component.
Michał Muszyński 13 days ago
Manage project deletion access
Add ability to enable or disable project deletion rights for individual users or organization owners.
Michał Muszyński About 2 months ago
Manage project deletion access
Add ability to enable or disable project deletion rights for individual users or organization owners.
Michał Muszyński About 2 months ago
Add a "Assignee" feature
I’d like a feature to assign tests to myself or teammates. This would let me delegate specific tests or entire suites, for updates or execution, making our daily routine more efficient. Filtering those assignees would be a plus too. At the test and suite page.
Wilker Augusto 3 months ago
Add a "Assignee" feature
I’d like a feature to assign tests to myself or teammates. This would let me delegate specific tests or entire suites, for updates or execution, making our daily routine more efficient. Filtering those assignees would be a plus too. At the test and suite page.
Wilker Augusto 3 months ago
Completed
Run details "created by" always shows updates to the name of the last person who executed the test
Can we have the “Created by” always showing the name of the creator of the test and have also a “Last updated” to showcase the name of the last person who updated the test? This is particularly important to us as we want to keep track who is creating/updating what.
Wilker Augusto 3 months ago
Completed
Run details "created by" always shows updates to the name of the last person who executed the test
Can we have the “Created by” always showing the name of the creator of the test and have also a “Last updated” to showcase the name of the last person who updated the test? This is particularly important to us as we want to keep track who is creating/updating what.
Wilker Augusto 3 months ago
Ability to generate from built-in variables a shorter or larger Name or Number
Currently, the randomNumber and RandomName variables are really useful to me but they are bound to the 10 digits and 8 letters. If I want more or less then that, I have to use javascript. Is there a way to improve this by default, letting me pick somehow the length for example?
Wilker Augusto 3 months ago
Ability to generate from built-in variables a shorter or larger Name or Number
Currently, the randomNumber and RandomName variables are really useful to me but they are bound to the 10 digits and 8 letters. If I want more or less then that, I have to use javascript. Is there a way to improve this by default, letting me pick somehow the length for example?
Wilker Augusto 3 months ago
Ability to deactivate a single instance of a component
Within a given test I use a component several times. I would like to deactivate one instance of the component’s use rather than deactivating them all for the test. Is this possible?
shannon@advanceware.com 5 months ago
Ability to deactivate a single instance of a component
Within a given test I use a component several times. I would like to deactivate one instance of the component’s use rather than deactivating them all for the test. Is this possible?
shannon@advanceware.com 5 months ago
Add support for sitemap checking
Sitemaps are pretty important and it’s nice to check they are functioning, i.e. perform a number of well-formed document checks, particularly when they are auto-generated. However, BugBug (not unreasonably) waits for the document readyState before checking a page, however, readyState is a part of the HTML DOM which doesn’t exist in the processing of a application/xml response, meaning checking appears impossible. I suspect a bit more of a difficult one?
Iain H 5 months ago
Add support for sitemap checking
Sitemaps are pretty important and it’s nice to check they are functioning, i.e. perform a number of well-formed document checks, particularly when they are auto-generated. However, BugBug (not unreasonably) waits for the document readyState before checking a page, however, readyState is a part of the HTML DOM which doesn’t exist in the processing of a application/xml response, meaning checking appears impossible. I suspect a bit more of a difficult one?
Iain H 5 months ago
Completed
Alphabetize Components
In both the Components screen and the Components selection pop-up it would be nice if components were sorted ascending by name. This would make it much easier to find what you’re looking for.
shannon@advanceware.com 5 months ago
Completed
Alphabetize Components
In both the Components screen and the Components selection pop-up it would be nice if components were sorted ascending by name. This would make it much easier to find what you’re looking for.
shannon@advanceware.com 5 months ago
Completed
Improve the search box
We review many tests and use the search box a lot. Often, letters are automatically deleted and we have to retype them over and over again. It would be very useful for us to improve this.
Ecasaseca 5 months ago
Completed
Improve the search box
We review many tests and use the search box a lot. Often, letters are automatically deleted and we have to retype them over and over again. It would be very useful for us to improve this.
Ecasaseca 5 months ago
Completed
Keep searches in the test list
When we search for tests in the list and click on one, when we return to the list, the search disappears and we have to re-enter what we searched for in the search field. It would be good if the search remained active.
Ecasaseca 6 months ago
Completed
Keep searches in the test list
When we search for tests in the list and click on one, when we return to the list, the search disappears and we have to re-enter what we searched for in the search field. It would be good if the search remained active.
Ecasaseca 6 months ago
Feature Request: Support for Chrome Launch Flags (e.g. screen sharing automation)
I’m currently trying to automate a test that involves screen sharing (e.g. clicking a “Share screen” button that triggers the browser’s native screen picker dialog). As you know, due to browser security restrictions, this dialog cannot be controlled via JavaScript or DOM automation. In tools like Puppeteer or Playwright, this limitation is usually bypassed by launching Chrome with specific flags, such as: --use-fake-ui-for-media-stream --enable-usermedia-screen-capturing --auto-select-desktop-capture-source="Entire screen" I would like to request the ability to configure such Chrome launch flags in BugBug test settings or project setup. This feature would be incredibly useful for testing scenarios that involve media devices, screen sharing, or permissions. Would it be possible to consider adding support for this in a future release?
majid y 6 months ago
Feature Request: Support for Chrome Launch Flags (e.g. screen sharing automation)
I’m currently trying to automate a test that involves screen sharing (e.g. clicking a “Share screen” button that triggers the browser’s native screen picker dialog). As you know, due to browser security restrictions, this dialog cannot be controlled via JavaScript or DOM automation. In tools like Puppeteer or Playwright, this limitation is usually bypassed by launching Chrome with specific flags, such as: --use-fake-ui-for-media-stream --enable-usermedia-screen-capturing --auto-select-desktop-capture-source="Entire screen" I would like to request the ability to configure such Chrome launch flags in BugBug test settings or project setup. This feature would be incredibly useful for testing scenarios that involve media devices, screen sharing, or permissions. Would it be possible to consider adding support for this in a future release?
majid y 6 months ago
Ability to read and write data from excel files
Would be awesome if in a test run we can open a excel file, read and write data and then upload it
priyam 6 months ago
Ability to read and write data from excel files
Would be awesome if in a test run we can open a excel file, read and write data and then upload it
priyam 6 months ago
IP-based access control
Add IP-based access control for logons to the application. This would be handy for all the customers running tests in production where either government or company security policies impose such regualtion. Preferably it would be configurable as IP whitelisting or IP filtering.
Michał Muszyński 7 months ago
IP-based access control
Add IP-based access control for logons to the application. This would be handy for all the customers running tests in production where either government or company security policies impose such regualtion. Preferably it would be configurable as IP whitelisting or IP filtering.
Michał Muszyński 7 months ago
Account lockout policy
Add account lockout when the login attempt fails multiple times over short period of time. This mechanism would help to protect against unauthorized access, especially brute-force attacks. Preferably it could be expanded to be configurable at organization settings level; Account Lockout – The account is temporarily or permanently disabled after a set number of failed login attempts. Lockout Threshold – The number of failed attempts allowed before locking the account. Lockout Duration – How long the account remains locked Exponential Backoff – Increase wait time between attempts instead of a full lockout. Rate Limiting – How many login attempts can be made in a certain time frame
Michał Muszyński 7 months ago
Account lockout policy
Add account lockout when the login attempt fails multiple times over short period of time. This mechanism would help to protect against unauthorized access, especially brute-force attacks. Preferably it could be expanded to be configurable at organization settings level; Account Lockout – The account is temporarily or permanently disabled after a set number of failed login attempts. Lockout Threshold – The number of failed attempts allowed before locking the account. Lockout Duration – How long the account remains locked Exponential Backoff – Increase wait time between attempts instead of a full lockout. Rate Limiting – How many login attempts can be made in a certain time frame
Michał Muszyński 7 months ago
Completed
Add notes to Suite execution similar to Tests page
Sometimes I want to leave notes to my colleagues directly on a suite execution, and right now It seems I can only place share those notes if I decide to down the report.
Wilker Augusto 7 months ago
Completed
Add notes to Suite execution similar to Tests page
Sometimes I want to leave notes to my colleagues directly on a suite execution, and right now It seems I can only place share those notes if I decide to down the report.
Wilker Augusto 7 months ago
Option to set execution retries per test
At the moment we have quite some flexibility of number of retries for tests in case they fail, but this is at a testsuite level. We’ve already split our testsuites into smaller ones depending on the feature of our software, but despite this, we would love to have even more granularity on which tests are retried upon failure. This feature request is to have an option to set the number of retries on a per test basis, which would take priority and ignore the retry levels of a testsuite. So for example I have: “Login testsuite” has 1 retrie enabled I have test “Login validations” inside this testsuite that has 3 retries set at a test level The test will retry 3 times, but the other tests inside the testsuite will retry only once in case they fail
Marius COJOCARIU 7 months ago
Option to set execution retries per test
At the moment we have quite some flexibility of number of retries for tests in case they fail, but this is at a testsuite level. We’ve already split our testsuites into smaller ones depending on the feature of our software, but despite this, we would love to have even more granularity on which tests are retried upon failure. This feature request is to have an option to set the number of retries on a per test basis, which would take priority and ignore the retry levels of a testsuite. So for example I have: “Login testsuite” has 1 retrie enabled I have test “Login validations” inside this testsuite that has 3 retries set at a test level The test will retry 3 times, but the other tests inside the testsuite will retry only once in case they fail
Marius COJOCARIU 7 months ago
