QualityLogic and an anonymised specialty retailer: POS test automation case analysed
Verdict: what is checkable
The evidence grade (this site's label for how a case is sourced: primary with client or press confirmation, secondary when vendor-hosted only.) is secondary: the only source is the vendor's own page; of 4 metrics, 0 are verifiable yes, 0 partial and 4 no. [ev-1693]
Client profile as published
- Client
The client provides global retail management software, including point-of-sale and store operations technology to specialty retailers across numerous countries
(the vendor's description; the vendor does not name the client)- Segment
- Specialty retail
- Region
- not stated in the source
- Channels
- stores
- Size indicators
specialty retailers across numerous countries
The client description and size indicators are quoted from the source; segment, region and channels are this site's classification. [ev-1693]
Systems in scope
- POS (point of sale: the till software and hardware that rings up store sales, takes card payments and prints receipts.): named in The Client section ("point-of-sale and store operations technology")
Where the source names each system is quoted or summarised from the case page. [ev-1693]
Problem as stated
The client sells retail management software, including point-of-sale and store operations products, to specialty retailers in many countries. Its end-to-end tests were written in a test framework that Google had deprecated. Hundreds of test cases and 18,000+ lines of test code would lose support as the underlying web framework moved on. Google advised rebuilding them in another framework, which by hand would take hundreds of hours. [ev-1693]
all of it at risk of going stale(quoted from the source)
Approach
- Testing types
- automation and functional (main scope: automation)
- Team shape
- QualityLogic's engineering team built the conversion tool; a hands-on engineer resolved the remaining inaccuracies
- Duration
- not stated
- Engagement model
- not stated
- Tooling named in the source
- Protractor, Playwright, custom Protractor-to-Playwright conversion tool built by QualityLogic
Metrics claimed
| Metric | Value | Unit | Claimed by | Verifiable | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conversion success rate of the tool | 95-98% | % | vendor | no | ev-1694 |
| Conversion time against estimated manual effort | 15 hours; an estimated 460 hours | hours | vendor | no | ev-1695 |
| Protractor test code at risk | 18,000+ | lines of test code | vendor | no | ev-1696 |
| Assumed manual throughput of one experienced automation engineer | 200-300 lines of code per day, of 4-8 tests | lines of code per day | vendor | no | ev-1697 |
What the case does not say
- Measurement method.
- Team size on both sides.
- Cost.
- What was out of scope.
- Whether the client is still a client.
- Date of the work.
Reading notes for a buyer
This case speaks to the scenario “POS rollout across stores” and feeds dimension D4 (Test automation evidence) of the methodology. A question to put to QualityLogic:
How was the conversion rate of the old tests measured, and how many converted tests ran green against the POS product after migration? [ev-1693]
Source and verification
- Source
- Case Study: Protractor to Playwright Migration
- Published
- not dated by the vendor
- Verified
- 2026-10-30
- Evidence grade
- secondary
- Corroborating sources
- none found
| Id | Claim | Source | Class | Grade | Published | Verified |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ev-1693 | Case Study: Protractor to Playwright Migration | Case Study: Protractor to Playwright Migration | vendor-case-study | secondary | 2026-10-30 | |
| ev-1694 | 95-98% conversion efficiency on the test cases run through the tool (the remainder handled by hand) | Case Study: Protractor to Playwright Migration | vendor-case-study | secondary | 2026-10-30 | |
| ev-1695 | QualityLogic utilized this tool to convert the 18,000+ lines of code representing hundreds of tests from Protractor to Playwright in just 15 hours, work that would’ve taken a team of engineers an estimated 460 hours. | Case Study: Protractor to Playwright Migration | vendor-case-study | secondary | 2026-10-30 | |
| ev-1696 | Our client had hundreds of test cases and 18,000+ lines of code in Protractor, all of it at risk of going stale as Angular moved forward without a supported test framework behind it. | Case Study: Protractor to Playwright Migration | vendor-case-study | secondary | 2026-10-30 | |
| ev-1697 | This move also occurred before the prevalence of AI coding tools, meaning the typical throughput of an experienced test automation engineer was 200-300 lines of code per day, of 4-8 tests. | Case Study: Protractor to Playwright Migration | vendor-case-study | secondary | 2026-10-30 |
Vendor profile: QualityLogic.
Positions on this page are computed from the methodology published at /methodology/ and from the evidence records linked on this page. Case study figures are the vendor's or the client's claims as published at the linked source; the "verifiable" column states what this site could check. The site does not recommend vendors, does not accept paid placement and does not publish rates. Last computed: 2026-11-03.
Published by the editor of retailqavendors.com. Last reviewed .