Timeline for What is meant by workaround
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 7, 2017 at 8:55 | comment | added | FDM | You are asking a question that could be a topic on its own. Please post a new question and accept this answer if your "workaround" query is clarified. | |
| Dec 7, 2017 at 8:43 | comment | added | user3584259 | "If you are talking about TESTING and not PRODUCTION / BUSINESS" does the severity is assigned based on testing or based on business? | |
| Dec 7, 2017 at 8:35 | comment | added | FDM | If you are talking about TESTING and not PRODUCTION / BUSINESS then this is a feature that cannot be tested as it's not working. So yes, then the defect could be considered 'blocking' (critical) for testing purposes. Because obviously, if it's a new product yet to be released, you'd want the core processes to work as designed... | |
| Dec 7, 2017 at 8:06 | comment | added | user3584259 | ok Iam with you, but dont think that the defect in the above user preven user from continue his testing? for that I say it is critical. So the question now does the severity is related to the impact on tester or on the customer. | |
| Dec 7, 2017 at 5:14 | comment | added | FDM | That is hard to judge without more context. I would say, if a user can use another function (provided by the system) to achieve the same thing, it sounds like an easy workaround and thus NOT critical. | |
| Dec 6, 2017 at 22:09 | comment | added | user3584259 | So what can I consider the defect in the above scenario, Minor or Critical? please advice | |
| Dec 6, 2017 at 21:12 | history | answered | FDM | CC BY-SA 3.0 |