<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Finding the balance between hacky and over-engineered UI test automation frameworks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.natontesting.com/2009/09/04/finding-the-balance-between-hacky-and-over-engineered-ui-test-automation-frameworks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.natontesting.com/2009/09/04/finding-the-balance-between-hacky-and-over-engineered-ui-test-automation-frameworks/</link>
	<description>nathaniel ritmeyer&#039;s thoughts on automated software testing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 15:37:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: jw</title>
		<link>http://www.natontesting.com/2009/09/04/finding-the-balance-between-hacky-and-over-engineered-ui-test-automation-frameworks/comment-page-1/#comment-170</link>
		<dc:creator>jw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:25:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.natontesting.com/?p=395#comment-170</guid>
		<description>well written, sobering and true to be sure, but still kind of leaves out the meat of the matter, which is &quot;how do i tell if it&#039;s over-engineered?&quot;  It seems to be a battle of extensibility vs. time.  Our product is really small and would take very little framework but they keep saying it&#039;s going to grow and grow.  i&#039;m less concerned with testing last-minute changes and more concerned with being able to test major new features.

i&#039;ve been looking at our my new co&#039;s half-written framework for a week deciding whether it needs to be scrapped (for some of the reasons in this and the &quot;duct-tape programmer&quot; article) but am now a little afraid i may be scrapping it for an equally over-engineered solution.

you freaked me out man, stop it!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>well written, sobering and true to be sure, but still kind of leaves out the meat of the matter, which is &#8220;how do i tell if it&#8217;s over-engineered?&#8221;  It seems to be a battle of extensibility vs. time.  Our product is really small and would take very little framework but they keep saying it&#8217;s going to grow and grow.  i&#8217;m less concerned with testing last-minute changes and more concerned with being able to test major new features.</p>
<p>i&#8217;ve been looking at our my new co&#8217;s half-written framework for a week deciding whether it needs to be scrapped (for some of the reasons in this and the &#8220;duct-tape programmer&#8221; article) but am now a little afraid i may be scrapping it for an equally over-engineered solution.</p>
<p>you freaked me out man, stop it!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

