Timeline for Recording data during tests execution
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 9, 2014 at 23:45 | comment | added | Jeff_Lucas | Absolutely not! Again, the question was why someone would require that level of documentation (i.e. the thought process behind it). I have had teams that were working on very critical processes that did require that level of documentation, but that was long ago. Personally, I think it is a complete waste of time. It is better to characterized "how" the tests are performed instead of detailed results (unless there is a bug). BTW, I have seen that level of detail a few years back using the QTP GUI automation tool. It was never of much use to me. | |
| Jun 8, 2014 at 8:37 | comment | added | user3251930 | So are you documenting test execution in your company? | |
| Jun 6, 2014 at 15:08 | comment | added | Jeff_Lucas | True, you can always rerun the test. However, you did specify that this is for (I assume) FDA certification. Let's say you ran the test and it passed. One year later, you find that the software failed in the field and the failure is traced to that test scenario. You set up the system to rerun the test and ... the test fails. That is the reason for the documentation. This is not a case of CYA, but a necessary step for tracing root cause of the problem. | |
| Jun 5, 2014 at 17:38 | comment | added | user3251930 | Thank you. However, you answered the question assuming that documentation of tests execution is required. But let's go deeper. Why is it required? If there is some problem in the field, then you can try just install the released version and try to reproduce the problem. You don't need to look at the test execution documentation. Why would you ever need to look there? Another question, did you have a policy that required recording details about the tests execution in the companies you worked at? | |
| Jun 5, 2014 at 16:16 | history | answered | Jeff_Lucas | CC BY-SA 3.0 |