Defending Fitnesse on at least one front

I admit it, yes I’m currently using Fitnesse. It seems you have to hang your head in shame these days for admitting that. Well ok for its original purpose of Acceptance Testing I do think it is pretty limited. However, I’ve found that it has been really good for Executable Documentation. It allows the development team, as a whole, to write the specs/test in what amounts to an abstracted language. "Why not just write a unit test", I hear you cry. Well, yes I (and the rest of the developers) could, but for the rest of team that’s just not viable. Fitnesse allows the team to write almost any test they want, with the occasional bit of dev support. This has two major advantages because; more authors means more available resources for creating tests, different views of a requirement produces better conversations earlier in the process.

So there you go, while waiting for StoryTeller and evaluating Cucumber, Courgette (bad joke), Concordia, etc, you may just want to give Fitnesse another look. It really isn’t that bad.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s