I was asked this question by a manager and don't actually know the correct answer for why we shouldn't simply share Katalon projects (e.g. on a network drive). Please help!

If two users, A and B, are both using the same Katalon project on a network drive, I would expect that files would be locked by the first user and therefore not editable by user B. Can user B even access the project though? If they can, can they create new test objects and tests cases?

We are not Git users but do have version control (TFS) which is not perfect when collaborating, since it does not support branching etc.

I'm lacking a second tester to try this out with at the moment and also suspect it isn't desirable but have no evidence for why not!

How should I solve my situation?

  • Any particular reason for running a git init and opening it for cloning? Commented Sep 17, 2019 at 22:38
  • We don't use Git in the business. Not my decision!
    – DanUK
    Commented Sep 18, 2019 at 7:40

2 Answers 2


Because I think tests should be versioned against the application code. So that if you fork, or run multiple versions of your applications (e.g. v1 and v2) for different clients you can still run the tests against that version, for example when making bugfixes.

Having a single folder means you only support the latest version. And versioning yourself in folders is pre-historic :) and prone to human errors.

TFS supports branching, but not as easy as git. TFS also supports Git, suggest you migrate the repositories.

For your question if Katalon supports multiple users on a shared network drive, I wouldnt try, but there is only one way to find out. Try it ;-)

Btw managers suggesting things like this should be removed from a team making software. This suggestion is so absurdly stupid, that this person has no clue how a proper software development/testing process looks like. Was it an interview question? That is the only place this could make sense.


There is also SVC, Subversion, Mercurial, etc. Any version control system will give control of the... version of your codebase. Git, and others, are great particularly because it's totally distributed, every repository is of the same "importance", technically. If you don't care about this characteristic, a centralised version control can be good enough.

  • 1
    Thanks João, I'm aware that version control is critical but wanted an answer to pass to a third party - namely, what would happen if we did not use version control at all? If I get another tester I'll update with proof but I don't imagine it would work, I just don't know to what extent it would go wrong. I hope that's clearer, thanks?
    – DanUK
    Commented Sep 18, 2019 at 14:38
  • This would be too broad to answer, because it depends of the sharing you put in place. In the end of the day, there will always be version control, because files are always local. The systems that I mention give the user (most) of the control of the versioning; other systems, such as Dropbox and Google Drive, give close to none control. But all have control of the versions. If you use a system that gives close to none control, it will happen exactly what the provider wants to happen. Commented Sep 18, 2019 at 14:44

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.