MantisBT - TestLink
View Issue Details
0005670TestLinkAPI - XMLRPCpublic2013-04-30 11:012014-07-28 20:33
normalfeature requestN/A
1.9.6 (2013 Q1 - bug fixing) 
1.9.11 (2014 Q2 - bug fixing) 
0005670: New xmlrpc call: assignTestCaseExecution
We noted that there is no possibility to assign test case execution of a specific build via xmlrpc. So after we (auto-)created a build and (auto-)executed the test cases for that build (which happen to not be assigned to any user), we would not get the test results displayed. In order to completely automate build and execution, we would like to propose an API extension, assignTestCaseExecution.

Here's the call signature:

assignTestCaseExecution ( Test Project, Test Plan, Platform, Ext. Test Case ID, Build name, user name )

I'm planning to allow for usage of descriptive names for each option (i.e. no DB IDs) in order to keep the API abstracted from the back-end database.
No tags attached.
Issue History
2013-04-30 11:01t_loNew Issue
2013-05-02 09:46weedbeatNote Added: 0018838
2013-05-02 09:57t_loNote Added: 0018840
2013-05-02 14:45fmanNote Added: 0018844
2013-05-03 11:46t_loNote Added: 0018858
2013-05-20 18:55fmanNote Added: 0018983
2013-05-27 11:54t_loNote Added: 0019032
2013-07-04 13:45t_loNote Added: 0019209
2013-07-04 17:52fmanNote Added: 0019211
2013-08-05 10:45fmanNote Added: 0019360
2013-09-09 20:46fmanNote Added: 0019591
2013-09-14 07:06fmanNote Added: 0019620
2013-09-17 21:15fmanNote Added: 0019656
2013-09-25 21:30fmanNote Added: 0019707
2013-10-01 19:37fmanNote Added: 0019739
2013-10-08 18:24fmanNote Added: 0019791
2014-02-15 16:38rehmanzNote Added: 0020451
2014-02-15 17:58fmanNote Added: 0020452
2014-06-07 18:06fmanQA Team - Task Workflow StatusTBD => READY FOR TESTING
2014-06-07 18:06fmanStatusnew => resolved
2014-06-07 18:06fmanFixed in Version => 1.9.11 (2014 Q2 - bug fixing)
2014-06-07 18:06fmanResolutionopen => fixed
2014-06-07 18:06fmanAssigned To => fman
2014-07-28 20:33fmanStatusresolved => closed

2013-05-02 09:46   
will take care of implementation, in case this rewquest gets approved.
2013-05-02 09:57   
Does our proposal meet the requirements for inclusion into the TestLink xmlrpc API? If so, then it would be great if we could assign this issue to weedbeat; he'll take care of the implementation, and would report back w/ patches.
2013-05-02 14:45   
Go ahead
Proceed this way

1. clone our gitorious repo (testlink_1_9)
2. when work will be finished create a MERGE REQUEST
3. please follow standard naming convention already in use on the file you ar going to change

I do not work with patches
2013-05-03 11:46   
Okay, we're on it.
2013-05-20 18:55   
any news ?
2013-05-27 11:54   
Currently churning through a jungle of backlog items on our side, sorry :)
We have it scheduled and should be able to start working on the implementation this week.
Anyways, thanks for asking!
2013-07-04 13:45   
This whole project just died at Profitbricks, I'm sorry.

TestLink in general was sacked; we're currently checking out alternatives. I understand that first volunteering for work and then not delivering pretty much sucks from a project's perspective. Sorry for the mess.
2013-07-04 17:52   
do not worry, sometimes things goes this way.
I would like just to ask you a favor:

please explain me why people do not like TestLink, this will be useful for the future (right know people from germany Cortado Team has adopted TL as it's tool).
In addition please let me know what will be the next choice.
2013-08-05 10:45   
would you mind to provide requested info ?
2013-09-09 20:46   
would you mind to provide requested info ?
2013-09-14 07:06   
would you mind to provide requested info ?
2013-09-17 21:15   
would you mind to provide requested info ?
2013-09-25 21:30   
would you mind to provide requested info ?
2013-10-01 19:37   
would you mind to provide requested info ?
2013-10-08 18:24   
would you mind to provide requested info ?
2014-02-15 16:38   
Any updates on this feature? I would really like to see this in action. We need this for our reporting! Thank you so much....
2014-02-15 17:58   
you can see for yourself: who has proposed himself to solve it has never provided info regarding how they have choose another tool.
From TestLink Dev team point of view this feature request has ETA.
If you want to contribute developing it is ok.
If you have no the skills to develope it, you need it and want to contribute sponsoring (paying for the development) contact us.