Testing APIs: Specmatic vs TextTest Emily Bache wanted to compare TextTest with Specmatic and has published a video about her experience: The BEST way to find BUGS in an API | Contract vs Approval Testing She observes, “Specmatic works best when the spec is defined independently in an ongoing discussion about expectations between the service […]
With Spring Cloud Contract we can start by authoring the API contract in one of the supported DSLs, based on which the provider / producer is verified and in the process stubs are generated for consumers. This makes it possible to leverage it as both a “consumer driven” or “provider driven” contract testing tool. There are also some interesting points about how we share contracts and stubs (through artifact managers, source control, etc.) with Spring Cloud Contract. Let us look at the detailed comparison between Specmatic and Spring Cloud Contract. Please do leave a comment if there are other areas of comparison on which you would like to see additional details.
Comparison: Specmatic vs Spring Cloud Contract Read More »
API mocking is only effective if the mocks are truly representative of the provider / services they are emulating. Deviations between mocks and providers can lead to integration issues much later in the development cycle. In order to avoid such issues it is important to keep in mind that selecting an API mocking tool is not an isolated decision. It has to be in line with your overall microservices development, testing and deployment goals.
Comparison: Specmatic vs WireMock Read More »
Specmatic and Contract Driven Development differ significantly from Pact. We built Specmatic out of our own necessity where Pact did not fit the bill for us. We have tried to cover as many areas of comparison as possible, however we would love to hear if you have any other criteria on which you would like to see additional details.
Comparison: Specmatic vs Pact.io and Pactflow.io Read More »
