visit
The deployment model may not be your primary criterion, but it can become a deal-breaker. In most cases, you will be just fine running a test management solution on the cloud. In fact, it is preferable for the following reasons:
Upkeep (and associated man-hour costs) lie with the solution provider.
Prices start low and can be scaled depending on the project.
Online availability enables work-from-home, both as a policy and emergency Covid containment measure.
Unfortunately, it’s the online availability that can be a problem. FinTech companies and banks, let alone government agencies can’t risk personal data getting leaked online. Sensitive industries have to use on-premise software, which entails:
Restricted access (office-only or corporate VPN).
Higher start fee for an enterprise license.
Various maintenance options that inevitably involve your IT resources.
Tailored solution to address your company’s unique needs.
The client vs web choice is about both preference and performance. Some people prefer to have everything they use at work as separate apps. After all, it makes sense to split tools where you actually work, talk about work, and show your progress. Desktop apps also have better offline functionality, although some web applications handle internet outages well.
The desktop convenience, however, is a double-edged sword. Some test management solutions may lack versions for individual operating systems, such as QTest lacking a Linux version. Desktop-only products can also frustrate management: you can’t simply use your phone to glance at unresolved issues or stability dashboards.
Performance-wise, both desktop and web apps can get things done at scale. Modern software architecture offloads as many calculations from the user as possible. When either cloud or on-premise server does the hard labor, web apps run virtually as well as desktop apps.
On the other hand, some solutions can become slower (no matter how you load them) due to architectural compromises. Here’s a review of from a seasoned user.
The test management tool of my company () has both a desktop and web version and most clients prefer the web one. Desktop aqua adepts are power users of the few features that we have not moved to the web yet. The company’s workspace synchronizes changes done in both versions, so every employee is free to use the one they like better.
Modern test case management solutions target more than just testers. You have the project manager who checks if things are going well. Sometimes, a product owner might get curious if any bugs would delay a new feature. Finally, you have software developers that need to know what bugs to fix first.
The use scenarios go beyond basic “read/write permissions”, and things only get harder when you run multiple projects.
When the functionality is available at all, you can usually create roles with more granular permissions or even change them for each individual user. Here are just some scenarios:
Junior Project Manager can see/comment on bug reports, but not edit them.
Senior Developer can mark a bug as done, but only Testers can verify that it is fixed and archive the ticket.
Members of the Agile team can access issues and tests from their projects only.
Apart from granularity, the difference in user permission often comes down to price. Some cloud solutions allow role-based access only if you buy a more expensive package ( charges at least 50% extra for that). Individual user permissions might be restricted to enterprise (see ) and/or on-premise licenses only. offers custom user permissions on all cloud and on-premise plans.
Now that you’ve decided what users can access, let’s see how they can access it. Even for a QA specialist, test management solutions give more information than one can handle or even need at the moment.
The common answer is functionality to see only items assigned to somebody and/or having a certain deadline. Such filters, however, usually lack flexibility and require too much clicking. Even when you usually cycle through similar sets of filters, you have to set them up every time.
So, it would be great to have all items in one place, but also have a neat and fast way to slice through them. Our solution was Views, which are advanced filters and presets of filters.
QA Lead can see which Software Tester has the least tickets to assign them a reproduction of a recently reported critical bug.
QA Lead can verify whether the Software Tester re-assigned items before leaving for vacation.
Product Owner can see if there are any unresolved defects that caused a recent spike in the abandonment rate.
Last but not least, Views can be a great collaborative tool. QA Leads can set them up for testers to help them see their area of responsibility. Testers can share their views to speed up sprint planning and daily standups.
In industries with mandatory external audits, software development and testing should be traceable. Regulatory compliances require that you know who deployed a new version of the software and how well it was tested beforehand.
Simple: you decouple public change history from regulatory-compliant logging.
In my case, aqua logs all actions of users. I have information on how all present and past employees interacted with my workspace, projects in it, and even individual items.
The record is unaffected by items and even entire projects removed from the workspace. The log cannot be edited, so it always displays a genuine timeline of changes.