Skip to main content

Traditional Test Engineering is DEAD

Here's an outline of Jason Arbon's arguments for Agile methods leaving traditional test engineering in the dust.

In the Better Software (May/June 2012) article "Traditional Test Engineering, Your Days are Numbered; Turing Software Quality on Its Head."

"In this shift to agile, late cycle or manual testing efforts are often dropped or, worse, the program management and development teams embrace agile and continuous practices, but the old world regression test cycle is left hanging around like an archaic ritual that adds a few days or weeks to an engineering process that wants to be continuous."

Test Plans - quick cycles out pace the ability of managers to create the traditional test plan. Modern software development teams do more concurrent testing than was ever done in traditional processes.

Regression Testing - ninety some precent pass all the time, is this a good use of time and energy. Create a risk view of the application under test. Use automated tools and focus time and energy on these risky areas.

Textual Bug Filing and Triage - this manual process is bugger than the software being reported upon. Try logging the number of defects with the defects already recorded in your logging system. Move to automated systems that report bugs with attached screen shots of the systems and the steps to reproduce the incident.

Bug and Work Item Backlogs - the best advice for managers is "Don't". If you have to refer to a list of bugs then you don't know your software. People that know and use your software know what bugs need to be fixed. That information is in there minds daily, ask them. There is no need of a list of bugs that will take 3 years to get to the end of it. Trust me - you will not forget the really important bugs.

Test Case Databases - these are a sign of non-agile work methods.  Databases are very heavyweight, compared to a lightweight list of areas to test that the team is currently work upon, and a suite of always green, passing tests.

Release Management - we are in an era of continuous releases, the question is not if or when the release goes out the door - but only if a feature is turned on or off in that particular release.  If your features can not be expressed in this binary state, your application is really old-school.

Team Structure - many smaller companies reap the benefits of crowdsourced testing teams that and virtualized testing teams.

----
see also:
The 21st century definition of TEST

Post a Comment

Most Popular on Agile Complexification Inverter

David's notes on "Drive"

- "The Surprising Truth about what Motivates Us" by Dan Pink.

Amazon book order
What I notice first and really like is the subtle implication in the shadow of the "i" in Drive is a person taking one step in a running motion.  This brings to mind the old saying - "there is no I in TEAM".  There is however a ME in TEAM, and there is an I in DRIVE.  And when one talks about motivating a team or an individual - it all starts with - what's in it for me.

Introduction

Pink starts with an early experiment with monkeys on problem solving.  Seems the monkeys were much better problem solver's than the scientist thought they should be.  This 1949 experiment is explained as the early understanding of motivation.  At the time there were two main drivers of motivation:  biological & external influences.  Harry F. Harlow defines the third drive in a novel theory:  "The performance of the task provided intrinsic reward" (p 3).  This is Dan Pink's M…

Exercise:: Definition of Ready & Done

Assuming you are on a Scrum/Agile software development team, then one of the first 'working agreements' you have created with your team is a 'Definition of Done' - right?



Oh - you don't have a definition of what aspects a user story that is done will exhibit. Well then, you need to create a list of attributes of a done story. One way to do this would be to Google 'definition of done' ... here let me do that for you: http://tinyurl.com/3br9o6n. Then you could just use someone else's definition - there DONE!

But that would be cheating -- right? It is not the artifact - the list of done criteria, that is important for your team - it is the act of doing it for themselves, it is that shared understanding of having a debate over some of the gray areas that create a true working agreement. If some of the team believes that a story being done means that there can be no bugs found in the code - but some believe that there can be some minor issues - well, …

Team Performance Model - by Drexler and Sibbet

Many of you have all heard of the Tuckman model of team dynamics (Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing).  It was created in 1966 and has become the most popular model for describing team behavior.  Is it time to level up in your mental model of team dynamics?  Are you ready for a richer more functional model?



Introducing the Team Performance Model by Drexler and Sibbet



Orientation - Why am I here?
"Orientation is about understanding the purpose of a team and assessing what it will mean to be a member.  you need to understand the reason the team exist, what will be expected of you and how you will benefit from membership.  In a new team, these are individual concerns, because the group is only potentially a team.  that is why these concerns are illustrated as occurring in your imagination at an intuitive level.  As a team leader it is important to provide time and space for people to answer these internal questions themselves."

Keys to when Orientation challenges are resolve…

Refactoring - examples from the book

Martin Fowler's book Refactoring:  Improving the Design of Existing Code has a simple example of a movie rental domain model, which he refactors from a less than ideal object-oriented design to a more robust OO design. Included in this Refactoring_FirstExample.zip Zip file are the Java source code files of the Movie, Rental, and Customer classes. Along with a JUnit CustomerTest class. Using these example source files you too can follow along with the refactoring that Fowler presents in the first few chapters of his book.


Do You Put “CSM” After Your Name?

I’ve noticed a new trend—people have been gaining titles. When I was younger, only doctors had initials (like MD) after their names. I always figured that was because society held doctors, and sometime priests (OFM) in such high regard that we wanted to point out their higher learning. I hope it was to encourage others to apply themselves in school and become doctors also. Could it have been boastful?

The Wikipedia describes these “post-nominal initials”:
Post-nominal letters, also called post-nominal initials, are letters placed after the name of a person to indicate that the individual holds a position, educational degree, accreditation, office, or honor. An individual may use several different sets of post-nominal letters. The order in which these are listed after a name is based on the order of precedence and category of the order. That’s good enough for me.
So I ask you: is the use of CSM or CSP an appropriate use of post-nominal initials?
If your not an agilista, you may wonder …