Timeline for What is the name of new feature testing in maintenance process?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 5, 2016 at 14:06 | history | edited | user246 |
edited tags
|
|
| Jan 22, 2015 at 13:16 | comment | added | tewoos | Chris, you are right. However, what you described should be the common viewpoint of testers. Every test case (scripted or in head) is a chance to break the system for a tester. Trying to prove "the defect is fixed" is more likely a developer's approach. :) | |
| Jan 21, 2015 at 21:42 | answer | added | Chris Kenst | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 21, 2015 at 21:23 | comment | added | Chris Kenst | I would argue you should /never/ attempt to confirm defects are fixed because its too easy to fall into a confirmation bias and miss important problems. Instead you should try to prove the fixed defects were not fixed and if you can't then state so. | |
| Jan 21, 2015 at 12:25 | answer | added | Kate Paulk | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 21, 2015 at 12:06 | answer | added | ashu | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jan 21, 2015 at 12:00 | history | edited | Kate Paulk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
minor spelling
|
| Jan 21, 2015 at 11:55 | review | First posts | |||
| Jan 21, 2015 at 12:00 | |||||
| Jan 21, 2015 at 11:53 | history | asked | tewoos | CC BY-SA 3.0 |