Dynamics 365 automation testing – Comparison Between EasyRepro, QA BOLDAutomation and Developing a Framework from Scratch

This article will explain the difference between Automation Testing approaches for any web application and specifically Microsoft Dynamics 365 applications. The approaches chosen for the comparison are enlisted below, 

  1. Developing an automation framework from scratch for Dynamics 365. 
  2. Using Microsoft’s solution – EasyRepro. 
  3. Using in-house developed QA BOLDAutomation framework. 

Developing an Automation Framework from Scratch for Dynamics 365 

Developing an automation framework from scratch is a tedious approach. However, it does come with its advantages. The pros and cons of this type of testing are listed below.  

Pros:

  1. Choose technology of choice as per requirements.  
  2. Customized framework design as per requirements. 
  3. Easier to pick and choose required modules for implementation.  

Cons:

  1. Consumes a lot of resources, time, effort, and investment.  
  2. If not taken up cautiously, it may not generate the desired results.  
  3. . A lot of energy must be invested in building the framework functionalities such as data manipulation, reporting, error logging, and exhibit collection. 
  4. Building commonly used web driver extension methods is time consuming.  
  5. Implementation of scalability to execute it in multi-browser environment. 
  6. Creating loosely coupled test cases is a long process due to the structure of the supporting framework..  
  7. The page object model design pattern needs to be defined properly.  
  8. If any update occurs in the base application, then reference to elements needs to be updated throughout the framework.  
  9. In the case of Dynamics 365, CRM admin specific operations are complex and tricky to integrate within the testing framework.  

Using Microsoft provided a solution – EasyRepro. 

EasyRepro is an automation framework that allows automated UI tests to be executed on any Dynamic 365 organization. This framework is built from the selenium web driver. Here are a few pros and cons of this.   

Pros:

  1. Requires less time and effort and reduces initial investment 
  2. Most of the web driver extension methods are already present. 
  3. All CRM Application updates are already catered for in the latest release. 
  4. The environment migration related updates are also catered for in the latest release of EasyRepro. 
  5. CRM Admin specific operations are already implemented and require very less customization.  
  6. The page object model design pattern is well defined.  

Cons:

  1. It is difficult to apprehend.  
  2. A lot of effort is required to build the framework functionality like data manipulation, reporting, error logging, and exhibit collection. 
  3. Scalability to execute it in multi-browser environment (by default, this framework does not work on the multi-browser). 
  4. Creating loosely coupled test cases is a long process due to the structure of the supporting framework. 

Using In-house developed QA BOLDAutomation framework 

AlphaBOLD has developed its automation framework, which is also based on the Selenium web driver. This can automate the tests related to Dynamic 365 organizations and other web applications. Here are a few pros and cons of the QA BOLDAutomation framework: 

Pros:

  1. Easy to apprehend.  
  2. It is already developed, so it takes less resources in terms of time, effort, and investment.  
  3. It is already deployed for clients, so it has matured over time, and it guarantees accurate results.  
  4. Functionality like data manipulation, reporting, error logging, and exhibit collection is already implemented.  
  5. It offers a vast array of web driver extension methods for commonly used operations.  
  6. Iframe handling and other tricky CRM application-specific functions are catered.  
  7. Cross-browser support is already established.  
  8. The framework is designed, so that test cases are loosely coupled and independent of each other.  
  9. Ease of importing EasyRepro libraries to accommodate the need of creating CRM-specific functions.  
  10. The page object model design pattern is established.  
  11. Supports the Addition of test scripts without affecting the basic structure.  
  12. Support simultaneous execution of test scripts by changing the configuration file. 

Cons:

  1. Updating the Page Object Model is time-consuming.  
  2. CRM Migration-related updates are time-consuming to integrate within this.  
  3. Implementation of CRM admin-specific operations is not yet done.  

Conclusion 

Therefore, by analyzing each approach’s detailed pros and cons, we can safely say that AlphaBOLD’s in-house developed QA BOLDAutomation is the right solution to customer’s automation needs to deliver a robust automation framework for Dynamics 365 testing in less time. It has all the essential components to set up a robust automation testing environment that saves time, effort, and resources. Furthermore, it supports data manipulation and helps achieve full Test Step Logging and exhibit collection alongside reporting capabilities. Again, its dynamic and flexible nature helps in building loosely coupled test suites besides cross-browser execution support. 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.