Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

2

On some projects testers certainly can benefit from knowing the status of unit tests. 1) To initiate discussions. If unit tests have not passed before the testing / release, I would like to know why. 2) On some cases testers being able to see the status of unit tests and ask these questions has positive impact on maintaining unit tests. Sometimes testers ...


2

Here are a few considerations: There are multiple reasons why a unit test might fail. Unit tests have to be maintained just like the system under test does. When a unit test breaks, it might point to a bug in the system under test, or it might point to a bug in the unit test (e.g. a timing issue), or it might even point to a unit test that no longer makes ...


2

QA and UAT have different goals. From a commercial stand point QA is there to make sure the clients will accept the version during UAT. After UAT, taking it into production and making sure the client does not run into (to many) critical issues. Client UAT is there to verify clients do not take a version into production that does not meet their minimal ...


2

I had a really bad experience of negligence of unit testing once. I was testing this web based project which was extremely time critical(I had only like 10 days to test like 7 months of development), and after 2 days of testing I could not see a single test pass. Everything I threw at the project failed to pass. It turned out that every single field in all ...


2

Run all the tests just right after the build as soon as possible, before deploying to the test environment. Developers should have feedback about their check-ins as soon as possible. Also you say the test-env is used for manual testing, why would you want to risk deploying a non working build. Certainly if you could have run the tests first. In short the ...


2

If QA and DEV environments are equal (have the same dependencies installed, the same build, etc.), there is no much sense to run acceptance tests on both of them, since it will be just duplicated execution and additional overhead in terms of analysing test results on two environments instead of one. Acceptance tests are the tests which provide you ...


1

Disclaimer: I work at Applause as the Director of Community (uTest). We offer some free services but from your brief description it sounds like you're looking for some of our paid services. As Chris mentioned, you can fill out a Pricing Request and/or Contact Us but I'm happy to help if you want to email me directly at msolar@applause.com. In the ...


1

The main difference between Acceptance and System testing is that Acceptance testing should be (in ideal world) defined before coding started. It is a suite of requirements/use cases agreed with customer, which must be passed to accept product. It is a part of "business". System test - it is a part of personal responsibility/quality of project QA. So, you ...


1

uTest was rebranded a while ago as Applause, but back when it was uTest I considered hiring them. I think I filled something out online and then a sales engineer followed up with a call. It's not free. When I chatted with them they charged per "test cycle" and recommended 3 cycles for our app. The test cycle was flat rate plus a monthly charge to use their ...


1

Sure, There is always a support methodology for everything, even for UAT. The only problem is that it is always context dependent. There is no one size fits all rule for such a thing. You have to identify the needs and requirements and develop a support methodology for UAT depending on the context of the SUT(system/software under test). For this you can take ...


1

There is no defined methodology for UAT support as such. However you can follow what we do. We are an Agile Team following Scrum. One iteration is dedicated to UAT support and we have a different test strategy for UAT support defining the roles, responsibilities, risk mitigation and escalation path. We do have QA on call support for 24*7 for these two weeks ...


1

The meaning unfortunately depends on the company you are working for and on the methodology you are following. Referring to the testing in the scope of software development I'd say that: QAT is the verification performed by the supplier on the product or service under development. It can be composed by simple manual testing or it could be an entire ...


1

to my experience in automation test, it is more valuable to run in qa environment but you should communicate with developer frequently on changing part which may affect your automated test cases so you can prepare your automated test cases during development phase and give priority to more static features of the product to prevent updating automated cases ...


1

As a rule of thumb you can think of it as the following: UAT is the QA for people who request the software to make sure the request is fulfilled. QA team is usually more technical and can troubleshoot issues that go past the enhancement request and how it affects the system overall. This may involve 3rd party data warehousing, reporting, communication ...


1

If I am a tester already involved in the same project, then I will find unit tests useful, in case they have ample evidence that they are run and executed concisely (description of expexted result and attached screenshots). Otherwise, if I have been assigned a responsibility to cover the quality requiremenrs of a project, then I would not be cinfident enough ...


1

I am system/integration tester working with competent developers. They are expected (and I fully trust them to do it) run unit tests before commit, and fix any broken unit tests promptly, and especially before start of any integration/system tests. We have huge unit test suite and on occasion some more obscure unit tests are broken for few days, if it does ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible