Skip to content
JZ Technology

12 / Quality, cloud & infrastructure

Regression checked on every change, not once a quarter

We build and maintain automated test suites a team actually trusts — running in CI, with the cost of maintenance worked out up front.

Manual regression has a fixed price: several days of a team's time before every release, and a quiet agreement that when things get rushed, less gets checked. The bigger the system, the more often that price is paid by cutting scope — and the defect surfaces at the customer.

Automation only solves that when the tests are maintained like production code. So we start from what is worth automating rather than from a tool: critical paths and repeatable regression go to the suite, one-off scenarios stay manual. The suite is written in Python with PyTest, version-controlled in your repository and run in the pipeline on every change — with a report you can read without an interpreter.

In the environments at PwC, Roche and E.ON where the firm's founder worked, a test suite is part of the release rather than a side project next to it — and that is exactly how we treat it here. We are equally direct about the limit: if maintaining a test would cost more than it is worth, we don't propose it.

What the service covers

  • A framework and a first working suite

    You come out of this stage with tests that actually run: the test project structure, environment configuration, test data and a suite covering the paths the business earns money on. No heroic coverage of "everything" — coverage of what hurts.

    • Approach and test project structure
    • Environment and test-data setup
    • A smoke suite for the critical paths
    • Readable execution reports
  • API and integration tests

    The cheapest tests in a suite and usually the best value: they check contracts between systems, response codes, validation rules and scenarios spanning several services — without the brittleness typical of interface tests.

    • REST endpoint and contract tests
    • Scenarios spanning several systems
    • Authorisation and input-validation tests
  • Interface tests and visual regression

    UI tests where they genuinely belong — on purchase, sign-in and form-completion paths. We write them to survive a layout change: selectors based on roles and data attributes rather than element order.

    • Critical user-path tests
    • Form and validation tests
    • Cross-browser execution
  • Running in CI/CD

    Tests nobody has to remember to run. We wire the suite into the pipeline (GitHub Actions), set quality gates on pull requests and nightly full-regression runs, and route the results to where the team already looks.

    • Quality gates on pull requests
    • Nightly regression and on-demand runs
    • Result notifications for the team
  • Rescuing a suite nobody believes

    A suite with half the tests disabled, where a red build stops nobody, is worse than no tests at all — it creates the illusion of control. We take those over: diagnose the causes of instability, fix or delete the tests carrying no value, and get the suite back to a state where a red build means something again.

    • Diagnosing and fixing flaky tests
    • Removing tests with no diagnostic value
    • Cutting suite execution time
    • Handover of the suite to the client's team

Typical situations

  • A full manual regression pass takes the team days, so before an urgent release it simply doesn't happen.

  • Automated tests exist, but they've been red for months and nobody looks at them any more.

  • You release several times a week and need a gate that stops a change from breaking payments.

  • The team can write code, but has nobody to set up a test framework that stays maintainable.

What you can count on

  • Regression runs automatically on every change — without blocking days of the team's time.
  • You know what the suite covers, what it deliberately does not, and what it costs to maintain.
  • A red build means something again, so the team reacts to it instead of routing around it.
  • Tests in your repository, written like production code — your team can take them over at any point.

Technologies

  • Python
  • PyTest
  • REST API testing
  • SQL
  • GitHub Actions
  • CI/CD

Questions about this service

Fewer than people assume. A dozen or so tests on the paths that generate revenue — sign-in, basket, payment, a key form — pay for themselves within a few releases, because they replace the most repetitive part of the manual work. Full coverage is rarely a sensible goal and we don't propose it by default.

No, and that isn't the point of it. Automation guards what repeats; a person finds what nobody wrote into a scenario. Automation frees a tester from clicking through regression so they can explore new features instead — and that is the right division of labour.

Usually yes, but we start by answering whether it's worth it. We review the suite and you get a short report: what works, what is unstable, what tests nothing meaningful, and how much work stands between the project and a usable state. If writing a basic suite from scratch is faster and cheaper, we say so plainly.

You decide. The tests live in your repository, they're documented and written in a standard stack, so your team can take them on — and the handover includes walking through the structure and the rules for adding new cases. You can also keep suite maintenance on our side.

Related services

  • QA and software testing

    Manual and automated testing, API, UI and regression tests, plus test strategy — a quality process that actually protects your releases.

  • DevOps and cloud

    CI/CD, Docker, Terraform and AWS, so releases become a single click and you hear about failures before your customers do.

  • Technical audits

    Audits of code, applications, websites, QA processes and infrastructure. Instead of opinions and reassurances, a written report with priorities and an action plan.

Let's work out what is worth automating in your project

Tell us what regression looks like before a release today and what you've already tried. You'll get a concrete answer: what we'd automate first, what we wouldn't, and why.