Uploaded image for project: 'Jenkins'
  1. Jenkins
  2. JENKINS-11085

QC test report is same as the Junit Test report(parsing the wrong file?)

    Details

    • Type: Bug
    • Status: Open (View Workflow)
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Component/s: qc-plugin
    • Labels:
      None
    • Environment:
      Hudson 1.389 running on a Windows box, with QTP/QC client installed properly
    • Similar Issues:

      Description

      I have a project that has both unit tests and QTP regression tests(hooked up with QC Plugin). If I disable the Junit report in the Post Build step(Junit test is still enabled), and only enable QC report, Hudson shows the test result trend graph properly. For instance, I have 3 QTP regression tests and it shows correctly 2 success 1 failure etc. But if I enable the Junit Test Report in the Post Build steps, I will see 2 identical test result trend graphs both showing the Junit test results(~100 of them). The QC test result is no where to be found

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            evertang Ever Tang added a comment -

            Additional information:

            I followed the instructions for setting up QC, did not change the QC test report filename etc.

            The QC report is generated under the workspace folder:

            workspace/qcreport-AdidasTestSet-17.xml (the file contains correct data)

            The Junit test reports are located at

            workspace/build/unittest-reports/TEST-xx.xml

            Show
            evertang Ever Tang added a comment - Additional information: I followed the instructions for setting up QC, did not change the QC test report filename etc. The QC report is generated under the workspace folder: workspace/qcreport-AdidasTestSet-17.xml (the file contains correct data) The Junit test reports are located at workspace/build/unittest-reports/TEST-xx.xml
            Hide
            rseguy Romain Seguy added a comment -

            This is "normal". The plugin generates results using the JUnit XML format. As such, both the JUnit publisher and the QC publisher can read the files.
            I suggest you set the input field of the JUnit publisher to a regexp which doesn't match the name of the QC result file.
            Tell me if it's ok.

            Show
            rseguy Romain Seguy added a comment - This is "normal". The plugin generates results using the JUnit XML format. As such, both the JUnit publisher and the QC publisher can read the files. I suggest you set the input field of the JUnit publisher to a regexp which doesn't match the name of the QC result file. Tell me if it's ok.
            Hide
            rseguy Romain Seguy added a comment -

            I've investigated this morning and, clearly, it's currently impossible to publish JUnit tests and QC tests on the same job: The underlying Java objects do conflict.

            Show
            rseguy Romain Seguy added a comment - I've investigated this morning and, clearly, it's currently impossible to publish JUnit tests and QC tests on the same job: The underlying Java objects do conflict.
            Hide
            evertang Ever Tang added a comment -

            Apologize for the dupe and thanks for the quick response. I actually found out a solution that works nicely. There is another plugin called LabeledTestGroupsPublisher which addresses the limitation of the Hudson's Junit test reporting. It allows me to group the tests based on file name pattern and give the group a label. Each group will have its own trend report.

            Thanks again!

            Show
            evertang Ever Tang added a comment - Apologize for the dupe and thanks for the quick response. I actually found out a solution that works nicely. There is another plugin called LabeledTestGroupsPublisher which addresses the limitation of the Hudson's Junit test reporting. It allows me to group the tests based on file name pattern and give the group a label. Each group will have its own trend report. Thanks again!
            Hide
            rseguy Romain Seguy added a comment -

            No problem, without the other issue I wouldn't have seen that it is actually a bug. I'll also take a look at the other plugin to see if I can get inspired from it to fix the bug.

            Show
            rseguy Romain Seguy added a comment - No problem, without the other issue I wouldn't have seen that it is actually a bug. I'll also take a look at the other plugin to see if I can get inspired from it to fix the bug.
            Hide
            evertang Ever Tang added a comment -

            That's great. Just want to say one more time I really appreciate your effort. Your solution has helped us greatly to implement the fully automated testing process. Keep it up!

            Show
            evertang Ever Tang added a comment - That's great. Just want to say one more time I really appreciate your effort. Your solution has helped us greatly to implement the fully automated testing process. Keep it up!

              People

              • Assignee:
                danielpetisme Daniel Petisme
                Reporter:
                evertang Ever Tang
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                0 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated: