DEV Community: Dzmitry Ananyeu

🚨 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐨𝐧 𝐌𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐀𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐓𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐩𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐓𝐞𝐚𝐦𝐬

Dzmitry Ananyeu — Thu, 22 May 2025 07:36:04 +0000

In many companies, I keep seeing the same good intentions that turn into counterproductive testing practices. Some come directly from job descriptions, others from how teams organize development.
Let’s talk about a few of them 👇

🧩 𝐋𝐞𝐭’𝐬 𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐝𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐨 𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐩𝐩
Sounds good. Developers will see and even run the tests, right?
In reality:
– Most devs ignore the test suite unless forced.
– Changes in test infra cause merge conflicts or CI noise.
– The repo becomes messier and harder to manage.

🚀 𝐋𝐞𝐭’𝐬 𝐫𝐮𝐧 𝐔𝐈/𝐀𝐏𝐈 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐂𝐈
Sure, let’s burn the world 🔥
If tests fail due to known unstable features or in-development code - what’s the point?
𝘚𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘴, 𝘊𝘐 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘶𝘯 𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴 - but I already see how dev forgot to select this and the build failed, and need to run again.

🧑‍💻 𝐃𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐬
Sometimes yes. But often:
– Devs have a product to build, not test infra to babysit.
– Good test design is a skill that needs time and practice.
– This can slow feature delivery and hurt test coverage quality.

🔧 𝐋𝐞𝐭’𝐬 𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞
Sure, let’s test a moving target.
Tests become outdated immediately, wasting hours and making test maintenance a nightmare.

💬 𝐎𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 '𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜' 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐟𝐥𝐚𝐰𝐞𝐝 𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐈’𝐯𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐞𝐧:

“Let’s have QA write test cases after release based on what’s already in prod.”
“Why use mocks? Just run everything against real services.”
“We’ll do E2E tests only — it covers everything!” (Hint: no, it doesn’t.)
“We don’t need flaky test handling — just fix the tests.” (Have fun debugging async race conditions.)
“Let’s auto-generate tests with AI — no need for logic anymore!” (until it tests the wrong thing... fast.)

✅ The key takeaway:
Automation is a tool, not a silver bullet. Use it where it brings clarity, stability, and speed. Otherwise, you’re just automating confusion.

softwaretesting #automation #qa #devops #cicd #testingfailures #qualityassurance #testautomation #flakytests

🚧 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐁𝐚𝐝 𝐓𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐀𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 (𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐖𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐭 𝐎𝐮𝐫𝐬)

Dzmitry Ananyeu — Tue, 20 May 2025 07:20:26 +0000

Our old test automation framework worked… but only on paper.
In practice? It slowed us down more than it helped.

Here’s what we faced:
🔹 Hardcoded test data
🔹 Long-running UI tests with sleeps
🔹 No clear structure - mixing locators, actions, and assertions
🔹 CI failures with zero context
🔹 Test ownership? Nobody wanted it.

We were spending more time maintaining tests than shipping features.
So, we hit pause and rebuilt our framework with a new mindset:
✅ Switched to a modular Page Object Model.
✅ Separated data, logic, and config.
✅ Introduced tagging, parallel runs, and retries.
✅ Added test ownership and reporting (Allure, TestRail sync).
✅ Shifted testing left with API/contract-first validation.
✅ And we deleted ~40% of outdated, useless tests.

🚀 The result?
Tests became trusted, not tolerated.
CI pipeline time dropped by 30%.
Developers started writing and running tests too.
We got back confidence - and time.

🧠 Architecture matters. Even in test automation.
Don’t underestimate the silent cost of "it kinda works.".

Have you gone through a test framework refactor before?

automation #testing #qalead #devops #cicd #softwarequality #selenium #pytest #testarchitecture #cleanframework

🎯 𝐋𝐞𝐭’𝐬 𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐅𝐥𝐚𝐤𝐲 𝐓𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐬 – 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐤𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧.

Dzmitry Ananyeu — Mon, 19 May 2025 05:51:02 +0000

You know the ones:
🔁 They pass.
❌ Then they fail.
✅ Then magically pass again.
All without a code change.

🤯 Why are they so dangerous?

They break trust in your test suite
Waste hours of debugging
Block CI/CD pipelines
Lead to “Ignore this test, it always fails 😒”

🛠 Real-world causes I’ve seen:

Timing issues Example: wait_for_element() didn’t wait long enough in slow environments
Data dependency A test passes locally but fails in CI because shared data is already modified
3rd-party services API mock wasn’t stable, external service had rate-limiting
Environment drift Works on Chrome vX, fails on vX+1
Bad Locator Find several web elements (not unique)
Fails only when run in parallel

✅ How to fight flakiness:
🔹 Use explicit waits, not hard sleeps
🔹 Reset or isolate test data
🔹 Add retries ONLY where absolutely needed (@flaky, rerunfailures) - here need to be very carefully
🔹 Log and analyze fail patterns over time
🔹 Isolate flaky tests and flag them for review
🔹 Use mocks to simulate unstable services
🔹 Run tests in consistent, clean environments (Docker, CI agents)

💬 A flaky test is worse than no test at all - because it lies to you.

qa #flakytests #automation #pytest #testautomation #softwaretesting #cicd #devops #linkedintech #qaengineer

𝐋𝐞𝐭’𝐬 𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐭-𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐐𝐀 -> 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐥𝐚𝐦𝐞.

Dzmitry Ananyeu — Tue, 13 May 2025 06:29:21 +0000

When something slips through and shows up in production, the key isn't panic or finger-pointing - it's structured analysis.

🔍 𝐇𝐞𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐈 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐭:

Reproduce & isolate the issue.
- Get the minimal steps, affected areas, and logs/data.
Trace the lifecycle of the defect:
- Was it missing in requirements?
- Was it untested? Or untestable?
- Was the automation flaky or skipped?
- Did CI/CD validations miss it?
Review the timeline:
- From ticket → dev → QA → release.
Look at tooling and coverage gaps:
- Could a static check or regression test have caught this?

𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭:
👥 𝐃𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐦𝐚𝐝𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞?
In my opinion - no.

We highlight the 𝐠𝐚𝐩 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬, not the person. If someone learns something from it - that's already a win. A transparent, blameless environment encourages better reporting and faster improvements.

✅ 𝐅𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬:

What will catch it next time?
What will help the person grow?
How can we prevent similar issues?
Mistakes are inevitable - improvement is optional. Let’s always choose the latter. What’s your QA post-incident process like? Do you agree with blameless retros?

👇 I’d love to hear your thoughts.

QA #PostMortem #BlamelessRetrospective #SoftwareTesting #ContinuousImprovement #RootCauseAnalysis #QualityAssurance #DevOps #CICD #NoBlameCulture

📱 𝐌𝐨𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐓𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐀𝐩𝐩𝐬 - 𝐉𝐚𝐯𝐚 𝐯𝐬 𝐏𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐧

Dzmitry Ananyeu — Sun, 11 May 2025 08:28:04 +0000

As someone who's worked with Appium and native mobile automation across different projects, here's a question I keep hearing:
👉 𝘞𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘮𝘰𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 - 𝘑𝘢𝘷𝘢 𝘰𝘳 𝘗𝘺𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘯?

Here’s my experience-based perspective:

🟨 𝐉𝐚𝐯𝐚 - 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐬 & 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐌𝐨𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧
✅ Strong IDE support (IntelliJ IDEA, Android Studio)
✅ Real multithreading and better control over parallel test execution
✅ Mature integrations with enterprise tools (TestNG, JUnit, Allure, Maven, Jenkins)
✅ Large and active Appium community for native mobile testing
🔻 Verbose syntax - requires more code for similar functionality
🔻 Steeper learning curve, less beginner-friendly for junior testers

🟦 𝐏𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐧 - 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐬 & 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐌𝐨𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧
✅ Concise and readable syntax - faster to write and easier to onboard
✅ Ideal for quick PoCs, startups, or smaller automation teams
✅ Smooth integration with BDD frameworks like Behave or Pytest-BDD
🔻 GIL (Global Interpreter Lock) limits true parallel execution
🔻 Smaller mobile testing community, especially for native apps
🔻 Can become hard to maintain at scale without strong architecture

🎯 Conclusion:

If you're building a scalable, enterprise-grade mobile automation solution, Java provides more control and long-term reliability.
If you're a startup or want to move fast, Python gets you there quicker - just make sure to invest in a solid structure early on.

💬 What's your go-to stack for native mobile automation - and why?

mobiletesting #appium #java #python #automationtesting #qaengineering #testautomation #bdd #selenium #softwaretesting

𝐒𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐅𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬 𝐨𝐫 𝐋𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐓𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧? 𝐍𝐨𝐭 𝐚 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦 - 𝐈𝐟 𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞.

Dzmitry Ananyeu — Sat, 10 May 2025 11:33:05 +0000

The more experience I gain, the more I’m convinced:
𝘐𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘴, 𝘴𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘊𝘺𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘗𝘭𝘢𝘺𝘸𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵, 𝘚𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘶𝘮, 𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘑𝘢𝘷𝘢 𝘵𝘰 𝘑𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘚𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘱𝘵 𝘰𝘳 𝘗𝘺𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘦.

It’s not about syntax. It’s about structure. Here's what really matters 👇

🧱 𝐂𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐈 𝐀𝐩𝐩𝐥𝐲 𝐑𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐜𝐤:

Use Page Object Model with clean separation
Build a Singleton for shared resources like DB connection
DeviceManager or BrowserFactory - with thread-safe handling (e.g., using locks) to support parallel test execution
Add BasePage with shared logic
Create BaseElement and atomic elements: Button, Input, Checkbox, etc
Use reusable steps and forms on pages
Make the framework configurable - for local & CI runs
Store test data in JSON (or other types), switch per environment
Add proper logs, linters, and reports with screenshots
Keep CI runner files clean and reproducible
Always update the README for easy setup

📌 This main mindset has helped me deliver fast, modular, maintainable automation in any language or tool because the foundation is solid.

💬 What are your non-negotiable architecture practices in test automation?
Feel free to add if I missed something 👇

qaautomation #testarchitecture #playwright #cypress #selenium #testing #automationframework #devops #qualityengineering #typescript #python #javascript #pageobjectmodel

🧪 𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐓𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐬: 𝐇𝐓𝐌𝐋 𝐯𝐬. 𝐀𝐥𝐥𝐮𝐫𝐞 — 𝐖𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐖𝐡𝐲?

Dzmitry Ananyeu — Fri, 09 May 2025 06:46:12 +0000

Over the past months, I’ve worked with both native HTML reports and Allure reports across multiple projects. While both serve the same purpose -> to visualize test results. They differ greatly in experience, complexity, and value.

Here’s a quick breakdown from an architect’s perspective:

⚖️ 𝐇𝐓𝐌𝐋 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭
➕ Pros:

Simple, built-in for many frameworks (Cypress, Playwright, Mocha, etc.)
Zero or minimal config
Easy to share

➖ Cons:

Flat, basic structure
Poor support for attachments (videos, screenshots)
No detailed step logging or timeline
Difficult to scale or integrate with CI dashboards

🚀 𝐀𝐥𝐥𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭
➕ Pros:

Rich UI with steps, attachments, history, timelines, flaky test detection
CI-friendly (works with Jenkins, GitHub, etc.)
Excellent integration with Playwright, JUnit, TestNG, etc.
Supports trend analysis, retries, nested steps

➖ Cons:

Setup is more complex (requires extra CLI, plugins)
Takes time to maintain, especially for custom steps or labels
Can bloat with large runs if not optimized

🛠️ Complexity
🕒 Setting up Allure correctly (with steps/screenshots/retries) can easily take a few hours or more

🚀 But the payoff is huge when your test results are readable, visual, and actionable

🎯 𝐌𝐲 𝐓𝐚𝐤𝐞?
For fast local runs or small projects - stick to HTML.
But for CI/CD pipelines, real QA dashboards, and serious reporting - Allure is worth every minute of setup.

💬 Have you worked with Allure? Do you still use basic HTML?
Which one gave your team the best visibility and debug speed?

testautomation #allure #cypress #playwright #qaengineering #devops #qualityengineering #reporting

#qa

🧠 𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐝𝐨 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐝𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬?

Dzmitry Ananyeu — Thu, 08 May 2025 11:16:50 +0000

A recurring theme in job descriptions and technical requests - and one that often misses the bigger picture.

The usual reasoning?
"𝘚𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘳𝘶𝘯, 𝘧𝘪𝘹, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘪𝘧 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘦𝘥."

But let's talk real-world scenarios. As someone who's been in QA automation architecture for years, here's what I've consistently seen:
🔍 1. 𝐃𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐨𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧.
Even when it's in the same language - Java, JS, TS, etc. - they rarely investigate failing tests. They don't have time, or it's not a priority. QA owns quality - let's be honest.
🔧 2. 𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬 𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬 𝐝𝐞𝐯𝐬 𝐝𝐨𝐧'𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡.
Playwright, Cypress, Selenium, Appium, RestAssured, JMeter - these require their own learning curve. Knowing Java doesn't mean knowing how to debug flaky WebDriver tests.
📉 3. 𝐋𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐠𝐞 ≠ 𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲.
Saying "use Java because our backend is in Java" ignores that writing scalable, maintainable, async-capable tests in Java requires real skill - not basic syntax. Same with JS/TS.
📱 4. 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐉𝐚𝐯𝐚?
Yes, Appium supports Java - but building an effective mobile framework is still a unique challenge. Language choice doesn't eliminate complexity.

🎯 So what's the real goal?
It should be:
✔️ Stability
✔️ Scalability
✔️ Visibility in CI
✔️ Clean architecture
✔️ Maintainability - by QA engineers

If developers really want to run tests - they need documentation, CI access, and a culture of collaboration more than they need matching syntax.

💬 I'm curious:
Are you enforcing the same language between dev and test?
Has it helped or hurt your QA velocity?
Let's talk real engineering, not theoretical convenience.

automationtesting #qaleadership #playwright #cypress #softwarequality #qaarchitecture #devops #mobiletesting #testautomation #qualityengineering

🚨 Cypress vs Playwright - Real-world wake-up call

Dzmitry Ananyeu — Wed, 07 May 2025 07:12:30 +0000

🚨 𝐂𝐲𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐯𝐬 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 - 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥-𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐰𝐚𝐤𝐞-𝐮𝐩 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥

Some days ago, I completed a test task:

🧪 𝐁𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝 𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐢𝐧 𝐂𝐲𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 + 𝐓𝐲𝐩𝐞𝐒𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐩𝐭
Features included:

CSV/Excel/JSON data reader
Page Object Model support
GitHub Actions CI integration + multirun
Report with screenshots

I delivered the task.
But halfway through… I realized something:
👉 Cypress is comfortable - until it isn't.
The deeper the task, the more friction I hit.

So here's a 𝐧𝐨-𝐟𝐥𝐮𝐟𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐨𝐧, based on actual experience 👇

✅ 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐂𝐲𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐬:
Multi-tabs / windows → ❌ 𝐂𝐲𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬: not supported | ✅ 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭: full control
Iframe handling → 😵‍💫 𝐂𝐲𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬: painful | ✅ 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭: native
File uploads & native events → ❌ 𝐂𝐲𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬: simulated | ✅ 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭: real
Parallel runs → 💰 𝐂𝐲𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬: paid only | ✅ 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭: built-in
API testing → ❌ 𝐂𝐲𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬: external tools | ✅ 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭: first-class support
Mobile emulation → ❌ 𝐂𝐲𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬: not really | ✅ 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭: full emulation (WEB only)
Selectors & wait logic → ❌ 𝐂𝐲𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬: manual, flaky | ✅ 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭: smart auto-wait
CI integration → 🛠 𝐂𝐲𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬: works | 🚀 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭: Docker-ready, fast, flexible

𝘠𝘦𝘴, 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘢 𝘭𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦, 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘢 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘊𝘺𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘗𝘭𝘢𝘺𝘸𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵, 𝘪𝘯 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘴, 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘰𝘹.

🧠 Cypress looks clean.
But it’s like riding a scooter with training wheels.

🚀 Playwright feels like a full QA engineering toolkit - built for 2025.

💬 Are you still using Cypress? Why?
Have you switched to Playwright? What’s your take?
I’d love to hear real experiences — not just docs and docs marketing.

qaautomation #playwright #cypress #testautomation #devtools #qualityengineering #typescript #qa #softwaretesting

𝐉𝐨𝐛 𝐡𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 2025: 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐬 𝐈’𝐯𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐝 👀

Dzmitry Ananyeu — Sun, 04 May 2025 07:34:39 +0000

While actively searching for new opportunities, I’ve come across a curious trend.
There are quite a few people who message you, saying they have an open role and asking for your CV. But once you send it, they reply:
“𝘠𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘊𝘝 𝘪𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘈𝘛𝘚-𝘰𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘥. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵.”

The thing is - I know my CV is solid. It scores well with ATS scanners and has already passed multiple screenings. But then comes the twist:
They offer a paid service to “fix” it. Even when I send a screenshot from an ATS scanner, they respond with, “𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘮 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥.”

The messages are often detailed and convincing. They ask about your background, why you’re switching jobs, your long-term goals, etc.

I can imagine how easily someone new to the job market might fall for it.

And the free “ATS checkers”?
Many of them also try to upsell you into premium services by flagging issues that often don’t matter.

Have you run into anything like this during your job search? Or maybe you’ve encountered even more creative scenarios?

Let’s help each other stay alert. 👇

jobsearch #opentowork #ats #cvscam #career #linkedincommunity

🧠 𝐒𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐐𝐀 𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐄𝐧𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐒𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐁𝐞 𝐆𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐮𝐚𝐥 𝐓𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬?

Dzmitry Ananyeu — Sat, 03 May 2025 09:56:38 +0000

After 13+ years in Quality Assurance - leading teams, building automation from scratch -> one truth keeps surfacing: automation is only as good as the mind behind it.

In many enterprises, automation engineers simply script already-written test cases. But startups? That’s a different universe.

In a fast-paced startup environment, you're not just writing tests. You’re:

Manually validating new features before there's any test plan.
Automating from intuition and collaboration, not specs.
Running performance benchmarks.
Raising critical usability issues missed in product reviews.

So here’s my question to the QA community:

👉 How do you maintain the right balance between sharp manual testing instincts and deep automation focus?

Personally, I believe a strong manual testing mindset isn't optional - it’s what empowers automation to be meaningful, context-aware, and truly valuable.

Would love to hear your thoughts. How do you keep both sides sharp in your QA practice?

qualityassurance #automationtesting #softwaretesting #qaengineer #startups #testautomation #leadership #careerreflection

13 Years in QA: Why I Still Get a Thrill from a Green Build

Dzmitry Ananyeu — Fri, 02 May 2025 08:23:03 +0000

It’s funny - 13 years ago I joined QA as that wide-eyed engineer who obsessively clicked “Run Test” and watched every log line. Today, I have big knowledges, and I still get that same little thrill when a green build pops up in Jenkins. Here’s a bit of how it feels to be “seasoned” in this profession:

𝐆𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐣𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐲
I built my first Selenium script in 2012 - now I’m maintaining frameworks across API, Web (Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge) and Mobile that cover 90%+ of our regressions.
Every time I see a two-hour suite finish instead of two days, I remember those evenings spent waiting on slow tests or with manual actions.

𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐞’𝐯𝐞 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝
• A two-click installer that spins up our entire automation platform in minutes.
• AI-driven test-case generators that slashed documentation time by 50%.
• Performance benchmarks (JMeter) that cut API test time by 40%.
• And too much else.

𝐇𝐮𝐦𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞
Leading and mentoring a team of brilliant QA and SDET engineers - watching them grow, ask better questions, and push back on assumptions - is the best part of my role. Together, we’ve shaved 30% off our release cycle and kept defect leakage under 1%.

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩𝐬 𝐦𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠?
The thrill of a new challenge: scaling automation for a cloud-native app, adopting the latest AI tooling, or just refactoring a flaky test into something rock solid. Even after 13 years, I feel more curious than ever.

𝐓𝐨 𝐦𝐲 𝐟𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰 𝐐𝐀 𝐯𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬: what still gives you that spark after a decade in the trenches? And to those just starting - keep asking “why,” keep automating, and - above all-keep learning. We’re in this together! 🚀

QA #TestAutomation #QualityEngineering #CareerJourney #CleanCode #CI_CD #OpenToWork