Test evaluation method and device in agile iteration and storage medium

Abstract

The invention provides a test evaluation method and device in agile iteration and a storage medium. The method mainly comprises the steps of data acquisition, index analysis, dynamic early warning, visual display and feedback optimization. The device comprises a data acquisition module, an index analysis module, a dynamic early warning module, a visualization module and a feedback optimization module. The storage medium implements the test evaluation method when the executable instruction is executed by the processor. By the adoption of the technical scheme, the test index early warning system is designed according to the agile development characteristics, through a series of real-time data evaluation indexes, team conditions and service conditions are dynamically combined, test activities can be accurately tracked, contribution and efficiency of testers can be quantified in real time, and the test efficiency can be improved. Intelligent index early warning can be provided to help to optimize task allocation, iteration strategies and the like, and project progress, team efficiency and product quality are improved; and meanwhile, a closed-loop feedback mechanism is also constructed, and the early warning rule is continuously optimized.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the technical field of software test management, and in particular relates to a test evaluation method, device and storage medium in agile iteration. Background Art

[0002] Agile development is often used in software development. The biggest feature of agile development is that it is highly iterative and can respond to frequent customer feedback in a timely and continuous manner. Agile testing is to constantly revise quality indicators, correctly establish testing strategies, confirm that effective customer needs can be fully met, and ensure that the entire production process is safe and timely release of the final product. Therefore, in agile development practice, the role of testers is becoming increasingly important. They must not only respond quickly to changes in requirements, but also ensure software quality.

[0003] Traditional assessment methods often focus on post-evaluation, which is difficult to adapt to the fast pace and dynamic needs of agile iterations. Or, although there are real-time data update reminders, they only display current indicators and lack the ability to provide early warnings, feedback and backtracking. Therefore, there is an urgent need for an assessment system that can evaluate the performance of testers in agile iterations in real time and comprehensively to promote team efficiency and product quality. Summary of the invention

[0004] In view of the above-mentioned shortcomings and deficiencies of the prior art, the present invention provides a test evaluation method, device and storage medium in agile iteration to solve the technical problems in the prior art that test activities cannot be tracked dynamically in real time, test indicators are dynamically warned and timely feedback cannot be given.

[0005] In order to achieve the above object, the main technical solutions adopted by the present invention include:

[0006] In a first aspect, an embodiment of the present invention provides a test evaluation method in an agile iteration, including:

[0007] Capture test-related data and team-related information in the agile development process from multiple data sources in real time;

[0008] Output multiple evaluation indicators based on preset calculation rules, and analyze whether the evaluation indicators trigger preset warning information in combination with preset thresholds, wherein the evaluation indicators include single indicators and comprehensive indicators;

[0009] Receive each of the evaluation indicators in real time, and select corresponding evaluation indicators as key analysis indicators in combination with the team-related information and business rules; if the key analysis indicators trigger the corresponding warning information, dynamically generate the corresponding warning level according to the preset warning level classification rules, and automatically start the corresponding problem solving process in combination with the project management process;

[0010] Visually display the warning information and the corresponding key evaluation indicators, and display the corresponding warning levels by marking different colors;

[0011] Project-related personnel provide feedback, process and analyze the warning results on a visual interface and continuously optimize the warning mechanism.

[0012] Furthermore, the real-time capture of test-related data and team-related information in the agile development process from multiple data sources includes: automatic collection of tester activity data through API interface integration with project management tools, code hosting platforms, and automated testing frameworks, including but not limited to test case creation and execution, defect discovery and tracking, automated script writing and maintenance, and code review participation; the dynamic message push device calls the ZenTao system API interface every day through a scheduled task to obtain team-related requirements, working hours, tasks and other related information, and synchronizes and saves them.

[0013] Furthermore, the single indicators include: automated test coverage, legacy defect ID, test case execution rate, field problem escape rate, and personnel productivity; the comprehensive indicators include: the combination of automated test coverage and time length, the combination of automated test coverage and personnel productivity, and the combination of field problem escape rate and legacy defect ID.

[0014] Furthermore, the warning information is dynamically generated into a corresponding warning level according to the preset warning level classification rules, including: according to the degree of deviation of the evaluation indicators and the scope of influence, the warning information is divided into minor warnings and serious warnings; wherein, the minor warnings include: serious failure to meet quality standards, too low output rate, and insufficient time invested in iterations; the serious warnings include: test cases are not executed according to standards, and the coverage of automated tests is too low.

[0015] Furthermore, if the key analysis indicator triggers the corresponding warning information, the warning information will be dynamically generated into a corresponding warning level according to the preset warning level classification rules, and the corresponding problem-solving process will be automatically started in combination with the project management process. It also includes: when the warning information contains the word "not up to standard", the system automatically pushes it to relevant project team members, product managers and managers through various forms such as email and instant messaging tools; at the same time, the system automatically displays the warning information and the corresponding evaluation indicators through the visual Fanruan report.

[0016] Furthermore, the automatically starting corresponding problem solving process includes: holding an ad hoc meeting to discuss countermeasures, adjusting the iteration plan to eliminate risks, and pushing the problem solving process to relevant decision makers.

[0017] Furthermore, the project-related personnel provide feedback, process and analyze the warning results in a visual interface, including: when there is an objection to the result of an indicator, the relevant personnel at all levels provide feedback on the confirmation, questioning and correction of the warning result by clicking the button next to the warning prompt; the continuous optimization of the warning mechanism includes: optimizing the algorithm of selecting the key analysis indicator for each evaluation indicator in combination with the team-related information and business rules.

[0018] In a second aspect, an embodiment of the present invention further provides a test evaluation device in agile iteration, comprising:

[0019] Data collection module, used to capture test-related data and team-related information in the agile development process from multiple data sources in real time;

[0020] The indicator analysis module is used to output a variety of evaluation indicators according to the preset calculation rules and thresholds and analyze whether the preset warning information is triggered;

[0021] A dynamic warning module is used to receive each of the evaluation indicators in real time, and select a number of corresponding evaluation indicators as key analysis indicators in combination with the team-related information and business rules; if the key analysis indicator triggers the corresponding warning information, the warning information is dynamically generated into a corresponding warning level according to the preset warning level classification rules, and the corresponding problem solving process is automatically started in combination with the project management process;

[0022] A visualization module is used to visualize the warning information and the corresponding key evaluation indicators, and to display the corresponding warning levels by marking different colors;

[0023] The feedback optimization module is used by project-related personnel to provide feedback, process and analyze early warning results in a visual interface, and continuously optimize the early warning mechanism.

[0024] Furthermore, the test evaluation device in the agile iteration also includes a dynamic message push device; the dynamic message push device calls the API interface of the ZenTao system through a scheduled task to obtain team-related requirements, working hours, tasks, test cases, defects, on-site problems, and dynamically synchronizes and stores them.

[0025] In a third aspect, an embodiment of the present invention further provides a computer-readable medium having computer-executable instructions stored thereon, characterized in that when the executable instructions are executed by a processor, the steps of a test evaluation method in agile iteration are implemented.

[0026] The technical solution of the present invention is a test indicator early warning system designed according to the characteristics of agile development. Through a series of real-time data evaluation indicators, it dynamically combines team conditions and business conditions. It can not only accurately track test activities and quantify the contribution and efficiency of testers in real time, but also provide intelligent indicator early warning to help optimize task allocation, iteration strategies, etc., to improve project progress, team efficiency, and product quality. At the same time, a closed-loop feedback mechanism is constructed to ensure the long-term effectiveness and flexible adaptability of the early warning system by continuously optimizing early warning rules, such as the selection of key analysis indicators and thresholds. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0027] Figure 1 A flowchart of a test evaluation method in agile iteration provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0028] Figure 2 A framework diagram of a test evaluation method and device in agile iteration provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0029] Figure 3 A schematic diagram of the structure of a test evaluation device in agile iteration provided in an embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0031] In order to make the above-mentioned objects, features and advantages of the present invention more obvious and easy to understand, the specific embodiments of the present invention are described in detail below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. Although certain embodiments of the present invention are shown in the accompanying drawings, it should be understood that the present invention can be implemented in various forms and should not be interpreted as being limited to the embodiments described herein. On the contrary, these embodiments are provided to provide a more thorough and complete understanding of the present invention. It should be understood that the drawings and embodiments of the present invention are only for exemplary purposes and are not intended to limit the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0032] According to an embodiment of the present application, an embodiment of a test evaluation method in an agile iteration is provided. It should be noted that the steps shown in the flowchart of the accompanying drawings can be executed in a computer system such as a set of computer executable instructions, and although a logical order is shown in the flowchart, in some cases, the steps shown or described can be executed in an order different from that here. Figure 1 The test evaluation method in agile iteration provided in the embodiment of the present application includes the following specific steps:

[0033] Step S1: Capture test-related data and team-related information in the agile development process from multiple data sources in real time.

[0034] First, you need to initialize the database table to store the real-time acquired data. This includes:

[0035] (1) Create a demand table. The specific information of the demand table structure created in this embodiment is shown in Table 1:

[0036] ID demandId demandName demandDescript associatedProject .1.. 1 Requirement 1 Requirement 1 Description Project 1 ...

[0037] Table 1

[0038] The columns in Table 1 are as follows: ID: unique identifier, in database auto-increment order. demandId: demand number. demandName: demand name. demandDescript: demand description. associatedProject: associated project.

[0039] (2) Create a work time sheet. The specific information of the “work time sheet” table structure created in this embodiment is shown in Table 2:

[0040] ID personId workTime estiWorkTime associatedTime .1.. 1 Actual working hours Estimated working hours Related Team ...

[0041] Table 2

[0042] The columns in Table 2 are as follows: ID: unique identifier, in database auto-increment order. personId: person ID. workTime: actual working hours. estiWorkTime: estimated working hours. associatedTime: associated team.

[0043] (3) Create a team task table. The specific information of the "team task table" structure created in this embodiment is shown in Table 3:

[0044] ID teamId teamPersonCode teamPersonName .1.. 1 001 Team Member 1 ...

[0045] Table 3

[0046] The columns in Table 3 are as follows: ID: unique identifier, in database auto-incremental order. teamId: team ID. teamPersonCode: team member ID. teamPersonName: team member name.

[0047] (4) Create a test case table. The specific information of the structure of the "test case table" created in this embodiment is shown in Table 4:

[0048]

[0049]

[0050] Table 4

[0051] The columns in Table 4 are described as follows: ID: unique identifier, in database auto-increment order. testCaseId: test case ID. testCaseName: test case name. testCaseSteps: test case steps. functionPoint: function point involved.

[0052] (5) Create a defect information table. The specific information of the structure of the "test defect table" created in this embodiment is shown in Table 5:

[0053] ID testBugId testBugName descript testBugCaseName .1.. 1 Added Click Add Saved successfully ...

[0054] Table 5

[0055] The columns in Table 5 are as follows: ID: unique identifier, in database auto-increment order. testBugId: defect ID. testBugName: defect name. descript: defect description. testBugCaseName: test case corresponding to the defect.

[0056] (6) Create a field problem table. The specific information of the structure of the "field problem table" created in this embodiment is shown in Table 6:

[0057] ID uuidd project_code product_module product_line .1.. 1 001 Product Module Product Line ...

[0058] Table 6

[0059] The columns in Table 6 are as follows: uuidd: unique identifier, in database auto-incremental order. project_code: project number. product_module: product module. product_line: product line.

[0060] After completing the initialization of the database, the key test data in the agile development process is captured in real time from multiple sources. This may include integration with project management tools (such as Jira), code hosting platforms (such as GitHub), automated testing frameworks, etc. through API interfaces to automatically collect testers' activity data, including but not limited to test case creation and execution, defect discovery and tracking, automated script writing and maintenance, code review participation, etc. As well as capturing various data in the agile iteration process, such as test cases, defect information, on-site issues, task information, story point information, etc.

[0061] In particular, it is also necessary to synchronize team-related data, which is obtained from the ZenTao system on a daily basis through a dynamic message push device and a scheduled task, including synchronization requirements, working hours, team tasks, defects, test cases, on-site problems, etc.

[0062] Step S2: output multiple evaluation indicators based on preset calculation rules, and analyze whether the evaluation indicators trigger preset warning information in combination with preset thresholds. The evaluation indicators include single indicators and comprehensive indicators.

[0063] The calculation of the single indicator and its definition involved in this embodiment is as follows:

[0064] (1) Automated test coverage: the number of use cases that have been automated tested / the total number of use cases.

[0065] (2) Legacy defect ID: After the iteration is completed, defects that are not in the closed state are considered legacy defects.

[0066] (3) Test case execution rate: number of executed test cases / total number of test cases.

[0067] (4) On-site problem escape rate: On-site problems discovered by the business line / (On-site problems discovered by the business line + defects discovered internally by the business line).

[0068] (5) Personnel output rate: the number of story points associated with an individual’s tasks*2 / individual available working hours.

[0069] Corresponding to the above single indicator, the preset threshold value and the corresponding triggered warning information of this embodiment are as follows:

[0070] 1. Legacy defect DI: The static threshold (iteration defect density exceeds 10%) and the dynamic threshold (increase of 20% compared with the same time point of the previous iteration) give a risk warning that the legacy defect DI value will exceed the standard.

[0071] 2. Automated test coverage: When the automated test coverage drops by more than 5% for two consecutive weeks, the "automated test coverage is too low" warning is triggered.

[0072] 3. Test case execution rate: When the test case execution rate is less than 95%, a warning of "test case not executed according to standard" will be given; when the test case execution rate is lower than 95% for two consecutive times, a warning of "quality not up to standard" will be given.

[0073] 4. On-site problem escape rate: When the on-site problem escape rate exceeds 5%, a "quality failure reminder" will be given; when the on-site problem escape rate exceeds 5% for two consecutive times, a "quality failure to meet standards" warning will be given.

[0074] 5. Personnel output rate: When the personnel output rate is lower than 98%, the situation of "personnel output rate is too low" will be given. When the personnel output rate is lower than 98% twice, the warning of "insufficient time invested in the iteration" will be given.

[0075] Combined with a single indicator, the comprehensive indicators involved in this embodiment, the corresponding thresholds and the triggered warning information are as follows:

[0076] 1. When the automated test coverage rate drops for three consecutive days and is below 90%, and the defect closure rate is below 80%, the "too low output rate" warning is triggered.

[0077] 2. When the automated test coverage is lower than 85% and the staff productivity is lower than 90%, the "too low productivity" warning is triggered.

[0078] 3. When the automated test coverage is lower than 85% and the staff productivity is lower than 90%, the "too low productivity" warning is triggered.

[0079] 4. When the on-site problem escape rate is higher than 5% and the residual defect DI is higher than 10%, the "serious quality failure" warning will be triggered.

[0080] Of course, the evaluation indicators provided in this embodiment are not limited to the single indicators and comprehensive indicators exemplified above, and those skilled in the art can adjust them adaptively according to the principles of the present application.

[0081] Step S3: Receive various evaluation indicators in real time, and select several corresponding evaluation indicators as key analysis indicators in combination with team-related information and business rules; if the key analysis indicators trigger corresponding warning information, the warning information is dynamically generated into a corresponding warning level according to the preset warning level classification rules, and the corresponding problem solving process is automatically started in combination with the project management process.

[0082] The various evaluation indicators calculated and output according to step S2 are stored in an indicator library, and the key indicators that need to be monitored can be dynamically taken out according to the characteristics of the project. For example: if team one is currently only in the research and development stage and has not been put into use on site, the key analysis indicators selected are only the legacy defects DI, test case execution rate, and personnel output rate; for another example: team two is currently in use on site, then the key analysis indicators selected are the legacy defects DI, test case execution rate, personnel output rate, and on-site problem escape rate. By continuously receiving evaluation indicator data and combining the specific circumstances of team information and business rules, when one of the selected key analysis indicators deviates from the normal range or reaches the preset threshold, an early warning event is immediately triggered to prompt the early warning information and the early warning level.

[0083] In this embodiment, the warning information is divided into minor warnings and serious warnings according to the degree of deviation of the evaluation indicators and the scope of influence. Among them, minor warnings include: serious failure to meet quality standards, too low output rate, and insufficient time invested in iterations; serious warnings include: test cases are not executed according to standards, and the coverage of automated tests is too low. Of course, the warning level classification applied in the present invention is not limited to the aforementioned method, and can be adaptively adjusted or supplemented according to specific business conditions and required standards.

[0084] In particular, when the warning information contains the word "not up to standard", the system automatically displays the warning information of the indicator through a visual Fanruan report. At the same time, the system automatically pushes it to relevant project team members, product managers and managers through various forms such as emails and instant messaging tools to ensure timely delivery of information.

[0085] In particular, the steps of this method are closely integrated with the project management process. When an early warning occurs, the system automatically starts the corresponding problem-solving process, such as holding an ad hoc meeting to discuss countermeasures, or adjusting the iteration plan to eliminate risks, and pushes the problem-solving process to relevant decision makers.

[0086] Step S4: Visually display the warning information and the corresponding key evaluation indicators, and display the corresponding warning levels by marking different colors.

[0087] Specifically, the warning information is presented in an intuitive graphical interface, such as highlighting the warning indicators on the project management platform, or marking the warning level with colors on the dashboard, so that team members can understand the project status at a glance. In this embodiment, the indicator status of specific testers is dynamically displayed through the Fanruan report. When the value of a specific indicator exceeds a certain indicator range, it is marked in red font to give a warning prompt.

[0088] Step S5: Project-related personnel provide feedback, process and analyze the warning results on the visual interface to continuously optimize the warning mechanism.

[0089] When there is a disagreement with the value of an indicator, the system provides a "dislike" button next to the warning prompt. By clicking this button, you can feedback whether there is a disagreement with the value of the indicator, what is the correct calculation method, etc. All levels, such as developers, testers, project managers, etc., can use this button to confirm, question or correct the warning results. By collecting feedback information from personnel at all levels, the algorithm is continuously upgraded and optimized, so that more accurate warning information can be returned.

[0090] In summary, the test evaluation method provided in this embodiment can, on the one hand, effectively provide dynamic warnings, help the team optimize task strategies in real time to respond to changes in agile development requirements, and achieve optimized feedback; on the other hand, it can assess the performance of testers more comprehensively and professionally, quantify the performance of testers in agile iterations, and promote team efficiency and product quality.

[0091] According to an embodiment of the present application, an embodiment of a test evaluation device in agile iteration is also provided. During the actual agile development iteration process, the test evaluation device can be embedded in a project management tool or an integrated development environment to monitor changes in various indicators in real time. Once an indicator is abnormal, an early warning is immediately triggered to help the team quickly locate the problem and take corresponding measures.

[0092] refer to Figure 2 and Figure 3 , the test evaluation device in the agile iteration of this embodiment includes:

[0093] 1. Data acquisition module P2: used to capture test-related data and team-related information in the agile development process from multiple data sources in real time. The test evaluation device of this embodiment is deployed on a single server. Through the effective operation of the data acquisition module, the team can obtain a real-time, comprehensive and high-quality data foundation in the agile development process, providing strong support for subsequent indicator analysis, dynamic warning, visual display and reporting, and feedback optimization.

[0094] 2. The indicator analysis module P3 is used to output multiple evaluation indicators according to the preset calculation rules and thresholds and analyze whether the preset warning information is triggered. The indicator analysis module aims to achieve refined monitoring of testers in agile development iteration activities through scientific data analysis methods, helping the team to discover problems and prevent risks in advance, so as to advance the project progress more steadily and efficiently.

[0095] 3. Dynamic early warning module P4 is used to receive each of the evaluation indicators in real time, and select corresponding evaluation indicators as key analysis indicators in combination with the team-related information and business rules; if the key analysis indicators trigger the corresponding early warning information, the early warning information is dynamically generated into a corresponding early warning level according to the preset early warning level classification rules, and the corresponding problem solving process is automatically started in combination with the project management process.

[0096] The dynamic warning module is an important part of the test indicator warning device in the agile development iteration process. Its core function is to dynamically generate and publish warning information based on the results output by the indicator analysis module, combined with real-time data and business rules, to assist the team in timely discovering and handling potential problems to ensure the smooth progress of the project. In particular, the dynamic warning module in this embodiment is closely integrated with the project management process to ensure rapid response and timely adjustment and optimization after the warning event is triggered.

[0097] 4. Visualization module P5 is used to visualize the warning information and the corresponding key evaluation indicators, and to display the corresponding warning level by marking different colors. In this embodiment, the indicator status of specific testers is dynamically displayed through the Fanruan report. By providing an interactive dashboard, the performance overview, indicator trends and warning information of testers are intuitively displayed in the form of charts, which is convenient for management and testers to self-evaluate and improve.

[0098] 4. Feedback optimization module P6 is used by project-related personnel to feedback, process and analyze early warning results in a visual interface, and continuously optimize the early warning mechanism.

[0099] Yet another embodiment of the present invention provides a computer-readable storage medium, including a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program and a processor. When the computer program is read and executed by the processor, the test evaluation method in agile iteration as described above is implemented.

[0100] The technical effect that can be achieved by this embodiment is basically the same as the technical effect that can be achieved by the test evaluation method in the aforementioned agile iteration, and will not be repeated here.

[0101] Since the system / device described in the above embodiments of the present invention is a system / device used to implement the method of the above embodiments of the present invention, a person skilled in the art can understand the specific structure and deformation of the system / device based on the method described in the above embodiments of the present invention, and thus will not be described in detail here. All systems / devices used in the method of the above embodiments of the present invention belong to the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0102] Although the present invention is disclosed as above, the protection scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Those skilled in the art may make various changes and modifications without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention, and these changes and modifications will fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A test evaluation method in agile iteration, characterized by include: Capture test-related data and team-related information in the agile development process from multiple data sources in real time; Output multiple evaluation indicators based on preset calculation rules, and analyze whether the evaluation indicators trigger preset warning information in combination with preset thresholds, wherein the evaluation indicators include single indicators and comprehensive indicators; Receive each of the evaluation indicators in real time, and select corresponding evaluation indicators as key analysis indicators in combination with the team-related information and business rules; if the key analysis indicators trigger the corresponding warning information, dynamically generate the corresponding warning level according to the preset warning level classification rules, and automatically start the corresponding problem solving process in combination with the project management process; Visually display the warning information and the corresponding key evaluation indicators, and display the corresponding warning levels by marking different colors; Project-related personnel provide feedback, process and analyze the warning results on a visual interface and continuously optimize the warning mechanism.

2. A test evaluation method in agile iteration as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that The real-time capture of test-related data and team-related information in the agile development process from multiple data sources includes: Through API interfaces, integration with project management tools, code hosting platforms, and automated testing frameworks, automatically collect testers' activity data, including but not limited to test case creation and execution, defect discovery and tracking, automated script writing and maintenance, and code review participation; The dynamic message push device calls the ZenTao system API interface every day through a scheduled task to obtain team-related needs, working hours, tasks and other related information, synchronize and save them.

3. A test evaluation method in agile iteration as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that The single indicators include: automated test coverage, legacy defect ID, test case execution rate, field problem escape rate, and personnel output rate; the comprehensive indicators include: the combination of automated test coverage and time length, the combination of automated test coverage and personnel output rate, and the combination of field problem escape rate and legacy defect ID.

4. A test evaluation method in agile iteration as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that The warning information is dynamically generated into a corresponding warning level according to the preset warning level classification rules, including: according to the degree of deviation of the evaluation indicators and the scope of influence, the warning information is divided into a minor warning and a serious warning; wherein the minor warning includes: serious failure to meet the quality standards, too low output rate, and insufficient time invested in iteration; the serious warning includes: test cases are not executed according to the standards, and the coverage of automated tests is too low.

5. A test evaluation method in agile iteration as claimed in claim 1 or 4, characterized in that If the key analysis indicator triggers the corresponding warning information, the warning information will be dynamically generated into a corresponding warning level according to the preset warning level classification rules, and the corresponding problem-solving process will be automatically started in combination with the project management process. It also includes: when the warning information contains the word "not up to standard", the system automatically pushes it to relevant project team members, product managers and managers through various forms such as email and instant messaging tools; at the same time, the system automatically displays the warning information and the corresponding evaluation indicators through the visual Fanruan report.

6. A test evaluation method in agile iteration as claimed in claim 1 or 4, characterized in that The automatically starting the corresponding problem solving process includes: holding an ad hoc meeting to discuss countermeasures, adjusting the iteration plan to eliminate risks, and pushing the problem solving process to relevant decision makers.

7. A test evaluation method in agile iteration as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that The project-related personnel provide feedback, process and analyze the warning results in a visual interface, including: when there is an objection to the result of an indicator, the relevant personnel at all levels provide feedback on the confirmation, questioning and correction of the warning results by clicking the button next to the warning prompt; the continuous optimization of the warning mechanism includes: the continuous optimization of the warning mechanism includes: optimizing the algorithm of selecting the key analysis indicators based on various evaluation indicators in combination with the team-related information and business rules.

8. A test evaluation device in agile iteration, characterized in that include: Data collection module, used to capture test-related data and team-related information in the agile development process from multiple data sources in real time; The indicator analysis module is used to output a variety of evaluation indicators according to the preset calculation rules and thresholds and analyze whether the preset warning information is triggered; A dynamic warning module is used to receive each of the evaluation indicators in real time, and select a number of corresponding evaluation indicators as key analysis indicators in combination with the team-related information and business rules; if the key analysis indicator triggers the corresponding warning information, the warning information is dynamically generated into a corresponding warning level according to the preset warning level classification rules, and the corresponding problem solving process is automatically started in combination with the project management process; A visualization module is used to visualize the warning information and the corresponding key evaluation indicators, and to display the corresponding warning levels by marking different colors; The feedback optimization module is used by project-related personnel to provide feedback, process and analyze early warning results in a visual interface, and continuously optimize the early warning mechanism.

9. A test evaluation device in agile iteration as claimed in claim 8, characterized in that It also includes a dynamic message push device, which calls the API interface of the ZenTao system through a scheduled task to obtain team-related requirements, working hours, tasks, test cases, defects, and on-site problems, and dynamically synchronizes and stores them.

10. A computer storage medium having computer executable instructions stored thereon, characterized in that: When the executable instructions are executed by the processor, a test evaluation method in an agile iteration as described in any one of claims 1 to 7 is implemented.

Images