System and method for efficient creation and reconciliation of macro and micro level test plans

Patent metadata

Field	Value
Publication number	US-2016132425-A1
Application number	US-201614996909-A
Country	US
Kind code	A1
Filing date	Jan 15, 2016
Priority date	Sep 11, 2009
Publication date	May 12, 2016
Grant date	—

Abstract

A method includes creating a macro plan for a test project, creating a micro plan for the test project, wherein the micro plan and the macro plan are based on at least one common parameter, and reconciling the macro plan and the micro plan by identifying deviations between the macro plan and the micro plan based on the at least one common parameter.

First claim

What is claimed is:

1 . A method implemented in a computer infrastructure having computer executable code tangibly embodied on a computer readable storage medium having programming instructions operable to:
create a macro plan for a test project for design of a software product that includes estimating an effort distribution and a defect distribution of defects in the software product, and generating a cost overview of the test project based on the effort distribution and the defect distribution; create a micro plan for the test project, wherein the micro plan and the macro plan are based on at least one common parameter; and reconcile the macro plan and the micro plan by identifying deviations between the macro plan and the micro plan based on the at least one common parameter, wherein the reconciling of the macro plan and the micro plan includes comparing the macro plan and the micro plan side-by-side to show the deviations which include at least one of effort, number of test cases and estimated defects between the macro plan and the micro plan based upon a matrix showing intersections of orthogonal defect classification (ODC) triggers and activities.

2 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the creating the macro plan further includes permitting a user to specify a constraint; and the effort distribution and the defect distribution are estimated based on the constraint.

3 . The method of claim 2 , wherein the constraint comprises one of total effort and maximum field defects.

4 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the programming instructions are further operable to:
permit a user to adjust one of the effort distribution and the defect distribution; and re-estimate the effort distribution and the defect distribution based on the adjusting.

5 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the creating the micro plan includes:
creating a system under test (SUT) model based on test requirements; receiving annotations of the SUT model from a user; and estimating a test case distribution for the SUT model.

6 . The method of claim 5 , wherein the test case distribution is based on a same set of triggers and activities as the macro plan.

7 . The method of claim 6 , wherein the annotations are related to aspects of use cases of the SUT model.

8 . The method of claim 7 , wherein the reconciling includes comparing at least one of effort, number of test cases, and estimated defects between the macro plan and the micro plan.

9 . The method of claim 8 , wherein the at least one of effort, number of test cases, and estimated defects are defined in terms of activities and triggers.

10 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the reconciling includes:
presenting the deviations between the macro plan and the micro plan to a user; and for at least one of the deviations, receiving from the user one of a confirmation of or an adjustment of at least one of the deviations, wherein the adjustment comprises at least one of:
manually changing a number of test cases in the micro plan,
annotating a use case of the micro plan, and
creating a new test case in the micro plan.

11 . The method of claim 1 , wherein a service provider at least one of creates, maintains, deploys and supports the computing infrastructure.

12 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the computing infrastructure is provided by a service provider under a subscription and/or fee agreement and/or based on advertising content to one or more third parties.

13 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the triggers include at least one of coverage, variation, sequence and interaction and the activities include at least one of system test, system integration test, performance test and user acceptance test.

Assignees

• IBM

Inventors

• Bassin Kathryn A
• Huang Sheng
• Kagan Steven
• Li Shao C
• Li Zhong J
• Liu He H
• Skrabanek Susan E
• Tan Hua F
• Zhu Jun

Classifications

• G06Q10/06375

  Prediction of business process outcome or impact based on a proposed change · CPC title

• G06Q10/00 Primary

  Administration; Management · CPC title

• G06Q10/103

  Workflow collaboration or project management · CPC title

• G06Q10/067

  Enterprise or organisation modelling · CPC title

• G06Q30/0244

  Optimization · CPC title