<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Python on EAMStream</title>
    <link>https://eamstream.com/tags/python/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Python on EAMStream</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://eamstream.com/tags/python/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Part 1 — Maximo Automation Testing through Selenium with Python — Dev Environment Setup and SSO</title>
      <link>https://eamstream.com/posts/maximo-automation-testing-selenium-python-part1/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 08 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://eamstream.com/posts/maximo-automation-testing-selenium-python-part1/</guid>
      <description>&lt;h3 id=&#34;1-background&#34;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. Background&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Comparing to manual testing, automation testing definitely has a lot of advantages: More precise testing, decrease testing time dramatically, integrate with DevOps process, etc. But the major challenge is to implement automation testing, especially for the complicate scenario. For example, some test cases required combine the functional and integration testing together. In my current Maximo project, there are a lot of test cases complicate like this. Each release requires a lot of effort to retest some of the test cases manually, also need to do the full regression testing manually to make sure the updates in the new release not breaking existing functions / interfaces. I started to look into automation testing solution for Maximo.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
