Timeline for What kind of testing should a developer do before passing a build to the QA team?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 13, 2011 at 9:22 | comment | added | Luke | I like step number 4 - we have a similar system where the tester assigned to my app will wander on over with a notepad and tell me any little bugs that appear before we chuck them into the bug tracker. Should really formalise that procedure. | |
| May 11, 2011 at 20:18 | comment | added | MichaelF | If its presented right it can go over well, other environments might be more receptive than your own. | |
| May 11, 2011 at 16:49 | comment | added | corsiKa♦ | @Michael I'm not saying it's not effective. I'm saying telling management it's a good idea will not go over well because it doesn't 'appear' to be productive. I know it is, you know it is, but they're the ones with the funding and the stamp of approval. @Ethel We have senior devs for management too, but I think the issue is that they were devs HERE, so the don't have experience in what one might call a best practices environment. | |
| May 11, 2011 at 16:45 | comment | added | Ethel Evans | The one change I would make is to make step 4 be step 1. Do the reviews on the plans first. This allows the developer to build in testability features and helps the tester avoid writing useless tests or missing key areas for testing. A review after coding might also be good, but I think a pre-review is much more important. @glowcoder, with the modification I mentioned, we do this on our (small, Agile) team, and I saw this at Microsoft as well (large, branch-and-merge). Both hire management with experience as senior developers, which seems key. | |
| May 11, 2011 at 14:17 | comment | added | MichaelF | I disagree glowcoder, I've seen this work in Agile shops, or on Scrum teams when looking at determining whether code is done. I've even done this on small teams when getting builds and doing an "interview" with the developer about what to test. | |
| May 11, 2011 at 14:04 | comment | added | corsiKa♦ | I don't doubt the benefits of this methodology. I do doubt the idea of management approving such "nonproductive" time spent. I know, I know. It's not nonproductive at all, but it appears to be on the surface, which is as far as management will look at it. :( | |
| May 11, 2011 at 11:53 | history | answered | Bruce McLeod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |