Method and system for handling failed test scenarios

1. A non-transitory computer readable medium for use in a computer to process failures of executing test scenarios on a data-oriented large-scale software system, the computer including a processor, and the non-transitory computer readable medium comprising:

program code for identifying failures of the test scenarios due to logical errors in the failed test scenarios; wherein at least 50% of instructions in the test scenarios are expressed by user interaction activities and not code-related language;

program code for forwarding the identified logical related failed test scenarios to a non-programmer user for manual evaluation; wherein the manual evaluation comprises manual re-recording of at least one of the logical related failed test scenarios, and wherein the non-programmer user holds a role equivalent to at least one of the following: ERP business analyst, business expert, and end-user;

program code for identifying a test scenario, from among the logical related failed test scenarios, which failed because of missing prerequisite, and directing the non-programmer user to re-record the test scenario in a way that enables a test recording and analysis component to identify the missing prerequisite;

program code for identifying failures of the test scenarios due to code errors; and

program code for forwarding the identified code related failed test scenarios to a programmer for code change.

2. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1 , wherein the logical errors result from parametric test scenarios that do not include clear specification of how to handle certain instances of a business process.

3. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1 , wherein the logical errors result from missing coverage of all variations of a business process.

4. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1 , wherein the logical errors result from inaccurate description of a business process.

5. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1 , wherein the code errors cause abnormal termination, and the abnormal termination does not include normal termination with a value different from expected value.

6. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 5 , wherein the abnormal termination is selected from the group of: internal system errors, activation errors, and compilation errors.

7. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 6 , wherein the computer runs Java programming language for Enterprise Resource Planning and the internal system errors are Java exceptions.

8. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 6 , wherein the computer runs Advanced Business Application Programming (ABAP) and the internal system errors are ABAP unexpected errors.

9. A computer system configured to process failures of executing test scenarios on a data-oriented large-scale software system, the computer system comprising:

a storage device containing computer usable code; and

a processing unit operable to execute the computer usable code to:

identify failures of the test scenarios due to logical errors in the failed test scenarios; wherein at least 50% of instructions in the test scenarios are expressed by user interaction activities and not code-related language;

forward the identified logical related failed test scenarios to a non-programmer user for manual evaluation; wherein the manual evaluation comprises manual re-recording of at least one of the logical related failed test scenarios, and wherein the non-programmer user holds a role equivalent to at least one of the following: ERP business analyst, business expert, and end-user;

identify a test scenario, from among the logical related failed test scenarios, which failed because of a missing prerequisite;

direct the non-programmer user to re-record the test scenario in a way that enables a test recording and analysis component to identify the missing prerequisite;

identify failures of the test scenarios due to code errors; and

forward the identified code related failed test scenarios to a programmer for code change.

10. The computer system of claim 9 , wherein the code errors result in abnormal terminations, and the abnormal terminations do not include normal terminations with values different from expected values.

11. The computer system of claim 9 , wherein the code errors result in abnormal terminations, and the abnormal terminations are selected from the group of: internal system errors, activation errors, and compilation errors.

12. The computer system of claim 9 , wherein the computer runs Java programming language for Enterprise Resource Planning and the internal system errors are Java exceptions.

13. The computer system of claim 11 , wherein the computer runs Advanced Business Application Programming (ABAP) and the internal system errors are ABAP unexpected errors.

14. A computer implemented method for correcting test scenarios using re-recording, comprising:

receiving descriptions of test scenarios that failed while executed by an automatic testing component; wherein at least 50% of instructions in the test scenarios are expressed by user interaction activities and not code-related language;

identifying the test scenarios that failed due to insufficient description while the code is fine;

identifying the test scenarios that failed due to code error;

forwarding to a non-programmer user, for manual re-recording, the test scenarios that failed due to insufficient description while the code is fine;

wherein the non-programmer user holds a role equivalent to at least one of the following: ERP business analyst, business expert, and end-user;

identifying a test scenario, from among the test scenarios that failed due to insufficient description while the code is fine, which failed because of a missing prerequisite, and directing the non-programmer user to re-record the test scenario in a way that enables a test recording and analysis component to identify the missing prerequisite; and

forwarding to a programmer, for code change, the test scenarios that failed due to code error.

15. The computer implemented method of claim 14 , wherein the step of identifying the test scenarios that failed due to insufficient description is performed by a non-programmer user.

16. The computer implemented method of claim 14 , wherein the step of identifying the test scenarios that failed due to code error is performed by a non-programmer user.

17. The computer implemented method of claim 14 , wherein a non-programmer user identifies test scenarios that failed with an abnormal termination as test scenarios that failed due to code error, wherein abnormal termination does not include normal termination with a value different from an expected value.

18. The computer implemented method of claim 14 , wherein a non-programmer user identifies test scenarios that do not result in predefined expected values as test scenarios that were failed due to insufficient description while the code is fine.