sqa-wiki

Pros of awesome-testing

• More organized structure with clear categories and subcategories
• Regularly updated with recent contributions
• Includes a wider range of testing-related resources, including tools, blogs, and courses

Cons of awesome-testing

• Less comprehensive in terms of academic and theoretical resources
• Focuses primarily on web and software testing, with less coverage of other domains
• May be overwhelming for beginners due to the large number of resources listed

Code comparison

Not applicable for these repositories, as they are primarily curated lists of resources without significant code content.

Summary

awesome-testing provides a well-organized and frequently updated collection of testing resources, with a focus on practical tools and resources for software testing. It offers a broader range of categories but may be less suitable for those seeking academic or theoretical materials.

sqa-wiki, on the other hand, offers a more comprehensive collection of academic and theoretical resources related to software quality assurance and testing. It covers a wider range of domains but may be less up-to-date and less organized compared to awesome-testing.

Both repositories serve as valuable resources for testers and quality assurance professionals, with each having its own strengths and target audience. The choice between them depends on the specific needs and interests of the user.

Pros of awesome-test-automation

• More comprehensive coverage of test automation tools and frameworks
• Better organized with clear categorization by programming language and testing type
• Regularly updated with contributions from the community

Cons of awesome-test-automation

• Focuses primarily on test automation, lacking broader QA topics
• May be overwhelming for beginners due to the extensive list of resources
• Less emphasis on general software testing concepts and methodologies

Code comparison

While both repositories primarily consist of curated lists rather than code, here's a brief comparison of their README structures:

awesome-test-automation:

# Awesome Test Automation

A curated list of awesome test automation frameworks, tools, libraries, and software for different programming languages.

## Programming languages

* [Python](#python)
* [Java](#java)
* [Ruby](#ruby)
* [C#](#c)
* [PHP](#php)

sqa-wiki:

# Software Testing Resources

A comprehensive list of resources on software testing and quality assurance.

## Contents

* [Testing Concepts](#testing-concepts)
* [Testing Techniques](#testing-techniques)
* [Test Management](#test-management)
* [Test Automation](#test-automation)

Both repositories serve as valuable resources for software testing professionals, with awesome-test-automation focusing more on automation tools and sqa-wiki offering a broader range of QA-related topics.

Pros of awesome-quality-assurance-roadmap

• Provides a structured roadmap for QA professionals, making it easier to navigate and follow a learning path
• Includes more interactive content, such as diagrams and visual aids
• Offers a more comprehensive coverage of modern QA practices and tools

Cons of awesome-quality-assurance-roadmap

• Less frequently updated compared to sqa-wiki
• Focuses primarily on web and mobile testing, potentially lacking depth in other areas of software testing
• May be overwhelming for beginners due to the extensive amount of information presented

Code Comparison

While both repositories primarily consist of markdown files and don't contain significant code, here's a comparison of their README structures:

sqa-wiki:

# Software Testing and QA
- [Books](#books)
- [Courses](#courses)
- [Podcasts](#podcasts)

awesome-quality-assurance-roadmap:

# Awesome Quality Assurance Roadmap
![QA Roadmap](./images/qa-roadmap.png)
## Table of Contents
- [1. Learn a Programming Language](#1-learn-a-programming-language)
- [2. Testing Fundamentals](#2-testing-fundamentals)

The awesome-quality-assurance-roadmap README includes a visual roadmap and a more detailed table of contents, while sqa-wiki opts for a simpler structure.

Pros of howtheytest

• More focused on real-world testing practices from specific companies
• Regularly updated with new content and contributions
• Better organized structure with company-specific sections

Cons of howtheytest

• Limited scope compared to sqa-wiki's broader coverage of software quality topics
• Less comprehensive in terms of general testing methodologies and techniques
• Fewer resources for learning about testing tools and frameworks

Code comparison

While both repositories primarily contain markdown files and don't have significant code content, here's a comparison of their directory structures:

howtheytest:

├── README.md
└── companies
    ├── Company1.md
    ├── Company2.md
    └── ...

sqa-wiki:

├── README.md
├── testing.md
├── tools.md
├── books.md
└── ...

howtheytest focuses on individual company practices, while sqa-wiki organizes content by topic. This structural difference reflects their distinct approaches to presenting software testing information.