ZAP UI evaluation

[josehkly]

Hi,

I have made an evaluation of ZAP UI using Bastien and Scapin’s Ergonomic criteria. Some issues were already on github reported before. Should I post the remaining issues via github web interface? 

[psiinon]

Thank you very much for this!

I agree that consistency is very important, and something I have no doubt we could do better :D

I think we all need a bit of time to digest this - there may well be differing opinions, or additional things people would like to be changed.

Feedback from everyone appreciated on this thread.

Once we have a consensus then I think a tracker issue would be more appropriate.

And also updates to the Development Rules and Guidelines: https://www.zaproxy.org/docs/developer/dev-rules-and-guidelines/

That way we can check new PRs against the new agreed standards.

Many thanks!

Simon

[josehkly]

Criterias are important, but users needs have to adapt them.

We could understand what ZAP GUI users needs by analysing a bit of user research.

Then focus on developement charge on that.

Less than 10% of users use the ZAP GUI while the others prefer the CLI. Recent survey results could also provide some info. 

Some errors seem not important individually (like consistency errors). Yet, if there are too many of them, the quality of the GUI decreases.

------- Original Message -------

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ZAP Developer Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to zaproxy-devel...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/zaproxy-develop/8b09fdd4-1197-42ce-899e-ab96cec6b7a2n%40googlegroups.com.

[thc...@gmail.com]

Hi,

I'd suggest you do the evaluations with a clean home directory, it seems
you are including add-ons that no longer exist.

Best regards.

[Najam Ul Saqib]

Yes josehkly, it would be better to revalidate the entries with the latest ZAP 2.14.0, and then go from there.

[josehkly]

A few entries were fixed with 2.14.0 release, I used a fresh instalation but it is possible that I missed a few screnshots.