Modern test automation rarely lives in one tidy place. A product may have browser tests in Playwright, service checks in another language, database validation in a separate repository, and several GitHub Actions workflows owned by different teams. That distribution is often healthy: each test suite can use the tools and release cadence that fit it best.
The problem appears one level above execution.
More output does not automatically create more visibility
CI providers are excellent at running jobs. They are not designed to answer every quality question across a product:
- Which sources are part of this regression campaign?
- Did the expected tests actually report a result?
- Is this a first attempt or a rerun?
- Which failures are probably the same underlying issue?
- Where are the logs and artifacts for the exact commit and environment?
Teams often answer these questions manually, by opening several workflow runs and reconstructing the story from job names, attachments, and chat messages.
Keep execution where it belongs
QaCockpit is designed as a control plane above existing CI. It does not become a general-purpose place for executing customer code. Repositories remain the source of truth for tests and workflow definitions. GitHub Actions keeps the execution environment, dependencies, and secrets.
QaCockpit models the parts that turn those runs into a quality operation:
- Test Sources describe repositories, workflows, frameworks, result formats, and artifact rules.
- Execution Profiles define safe and reusable ways to start a particular scope.
- Campaigns coordinate profiles in understandable regression stages.
- Attempts and results preserve the context returned by CI.
- Failure clusters give investigation a focused starting point.
The result is one product-level view without forcing every team into the same test framework or repository.
The signal matters after the pipeline ends
A green or red job is only the first level of information. Quality leaders need to understand coverage, missing evidence, repeated failures, ownership, and change over time. Engineers need the exact artifact and stack trace behind a failed attempt. Product teams need a shared answer to whether a release candidate has completed the intended regression scope.
That is the gap QaCockpit is being built to close.
We are currently working with early-access teams and shaping the integration flow around real automation landscapes. If this problem sounds familiar, contact us and tell us how your regression process works today.