Map Requirement Tag to Testcase Property

[timgrohmann]

🤔 What's the problem you're trying to solve?

When trying to import JUnit Reports generated by this formatter into XRay, there is currently no way to link the JUnit Testcases with JIRA Requirements automatically due to lack of support for setting custom properties on a entry in the report.

✨ What's your proposed solution?

We should allow custom properties to be extracted from Cucumber tags.

See XRay documentation for supported XML examples. Maybe we could map all scenario tags following a naming scheme (e.g. @Req:PROJ-1234) to properties on the <testcase> object.

⛏ Have you considered any alternatives or workarounds?

As this library does not support adding any custom properties, no workaround is possible.

📚 Any additional context?

I'm happy to contribute if you are willing to add this as a library feature :)

[mpkorstanje]

Taking the the high fidelity output from Cucumber and flattening it into low fidelity JUnit XML report loses information (as you've noticed). Bringing back some of that fidelity back by using custom XRay extensions on the JUnit format feel quite hacky.

There also quite a few custom Xray properties:

• test_id
• requirement
• test_summary
• test_description
• tags
• testrun_comment
• testrun_evidence
• testrun_customfields

If we support one, it is likely that eventually will support all. Supporting all properties would turn this project into an Xray JUnit formatter. This somewhat exceeds the scope of this project. 😉

Further more, I don't think anyone on the core team has a much XRay experience so we'd wouldn't be able to judge what would and would not be good improvements.

So I think it would make more sense to fork this project.

Once forked I can see a few options:

• You can modify the project into producing the Xray JUnit format with sensible support for most xray properties
• You can modify the project to produce a report in the XRAY JSON format. This would avoid the low fidelity in between step all together.

Then if you are willing and able to maintain the project we can publish it in the Cucumber org and potentially integrate it into Cucumber JVM and JS. Or if you think that is too much work, then you can publish on your personal account and put in exactly as much effort as you want/need.

What do you think?

Maybe we could map all scenario tags following a naming scheme (e.g. @Req:PROJ-1234) to properties on the object.

I don't think a fixed naming scheme is going to work. It is likely that people will already have their own format. So instead the user might provide the plugin with configuration that describes how to tags should be convereted to xray properties e.g.: extractRequirements(pickle: Pickle) : List<String>, extractTestId(pickle: Pickle) : List<String>, ect.

We can of course pick and document sensible defaults here.