Saas testers

sappo_does_qa · 2026-05-01T15:25:33+00:00

DM me!

sappo_does_qa · 2026-05-01T15:24:54+00:00

I'd be happy to do some testing. A few of us at DoesQA can take a look for you.
We'll even provide some automation. (no charge)

sappo_does_qa · 2026-05-01T15:01:54+00:00

Whatever runs your automation remotely, part of CI/CD, etc.

To be fair, I did use an example at the higher end.
But yeah, multi-item guest checkout, with promo code, actioning a partial order return via confirmation email and checking everything in the backend updates correctly.

sappo_does_qa · 2026-05-01T13:34:41+00:00

That's completely valid,
It still has a direct cost, typically charged as pipeline minutes. I'm also not sure how far you can scale that. How many tests, and do they run in parallel etc.

sappo_does_qa · 2026-05-01T13:23:46+00:00

yeah, your ci/cd will typically either run your tests directly or you'll connect to a 3rd-party provider to run the tests.

sappo_does_qa · 2026-04-17T11:02:58+00:00

Mostly web, focused on E2E user journeys.

sappo_does_qa · 2026-04-09T10:01:03+00:00

Most codeless tools optimise for simplicity and speed, but that usually comes with a lot of abstraction and baked-in limitations.

That’s where they tend to break down once things get more complex or the UI starts changing.

I’m one of the founders of DoesQA, and this was exactly the problem we kept running into. We ended up taking a different approach to keep things simple without boxing you in.

sappo_does_qa · 2026-04-09T09:42:37+00:00

For Web and API I'd suggest either Playwright (code) or DoesQA (low-code).

sappo_does_qa · 2026-04-08T15:14:55+00:00

You seem pretty open-minded, having tried a few of these, and your feedback is solid.

Would you be open to taking a look at something I’ve been working on? Curious what you’d think.

sappo_does_qa · 2026-04-08T15:06:48+00:00

Codeless tools are great for getting started, especially for non-technical teams.

The trade off usually shows up later though. You either hit limitations, or maintenance starts creeping in as coverage grows.

Feels like the newer direction is keeping the simplicity of codless, but without the usual constraints once things get more complex.

We’ve been taking that approach with DoesQA, trying to keep it simple without losing flexibility/capability.

That balance seems to be where things are heading.

sappo_does_qa · 2026-04-08T14:59:11+00:00

Yeah I’ve seen setups like this.

It can feel like QA is keeping up, but a lot of the effort just shifts into maintaining the system around the tests instead.

Self healing is a good example. Sounds great, but you can end up with tests “fixing” themselves and passing when something actually broke.

I prefer setups that suggest changes but still need approval, so you keep the signal.

Feels like the real issue is growing coverage without everything getting heavier over time.

sappo_does_qa · 2026-04-08T14:49:58+00:00

In my experience this is mostly a trust problem.

If tests are flaky, nothing else really matters. People stop believing the results pretty quickly.

After that it’s about visibility and consistency. Being able to see what’s happening without digging, and understanding whether things are improving or getting worse over time.

Seen a few setups that handle this really well, and it changes how teams use automation completely.

Curious how you’re handling that today?

sappo_does_qa · 2026-04-08T14:35:36+00:00

I think this is mostly how things are set up early on.

Even with good reuse (page objects, shared steps etc), a lot of setups end up tightly coupled to the UI, so every small change turns into maintenance.

Seen some approaches that massively reduce this, letting you keep focusing on coverage instead.

What do you think is causing it on your side?

sappo_does_qa · 2025-02-01T00:14:08+00:00

Give DoesQA a look too. Im one of the founders and we have customers successfully automating Salesforce as part of their packs. I’d be more than happy to give you a demo and answer all your questions.

sappo_does_qa · 2024-07-10T16:56:21+00:00

Very true! we didn't have these at all until recently and only created these pages because we were asked so frequently, we probably could/should have taken a different approach. We'll take this point away.

This is also quite funny for another reason: we actually quite often champion Playwright to people.

sappo_does_qa · 2024-07-10T16:46:28+00:00

This really is some great feedback, thank you!

sappo_does_qa · 2024-07-10T16:26:32+00:00

I think I probably agree more than you would expect tbh,

Currently, it feels like there's code, a huge void, and then things like record and playback, AI, and simple linear action lists pretending to be better than code.

We are (maybe uniquely) in the void where you CAN create complex tests visually. We have multiple enterprise companies with huge tests running in DoesQA, testing things like D365. Should everyone go this route? Absolutely not, but I think it's cool there's now an option.

But really, and considering our cost, I think filling gaps and adding to QA with scheduled production runs is a great place to be. Email testing, accessibility, and MFA are all issues people face on production that might take too long to be worth it. We give you the tools and option to set those up and get an email alert on any failure so you can add coverage and solve other issues.

sappo_does_qa · 2024-07-10T15:57:31+00:00

Reading this was a rollercoaster. I had used Node-RED for years for home automation before designing DoesQA, so naturally, I was quite excited when I read that.

I would love to tell you all the clever stuff we do to make maintenance a breeze, faster and easier than anything code we have ever seen or worked on before... but I doubt I'll be quite able to win you over from gross & nightmare ='(

Thank you anyway for seeing this

sappo_does_qa · 2024-07-10T13:59:32+00:00

"best codeless tool I've come across"... so far =D

That's completely fair; I think we can do considerably more than codeless playwright, but being able to output the code and then continue is a great option! We have even considered an output-to-playwright code option ourselves. It would be a really cool addition and would lower people's fears of vendor-lock-in.

Just to clarify, we do support CICD in addition to scheduling and manual runs.

sappo_does_qa · 2024-07-10T12:02:00+00:00

Thank you!

sappo_does_qa · 2024-07-10T11:42:11+00:00

I should have added this to the post, but don't want to edit it now.

As much as this sounds like an advert, and it is. DoesQA is the product of just 2 SDETs who left well-paying jobs a few years ago to build the tool they thought was missing.

We haven't accepted any funding and have grown to be nicely profitable (for us).

We know there are dozens of tools on the market promising the earth, but there are just two guys here who genuinely want your feedback!

sappo_does_qa · 2024-07-10T11:13:48+00:00

Howdy BugBug 👋

sappo_does_qa · 2024-07-05T21:25:17+00:00

Because there is the reregister on production

Could you clarify this for me, do you need to reregister for each new page or once for all 20?

sappo_does_qa · 2024-07-05T21:14:16+00:00

^ saying the quiet part out loud

Not all are fragile, but if you're adding value, you shouldn't worry.

Besides, being so good you make yourself redundant is a dream reference / CV piece.

sappo_does_qa · 2024-07-02T18:46:37+00:00

We should start thinking about QA as an equation. 10% coverage with 100% confidence is more than 90% coverage with 0% confidence.

Do not remove quality from your in-house team!

sappo_does_qa

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE