I'm a reasonably inexperienced developer, and I recently got into a debate with the manager of our current project.
It's a concept demonstration for trial funded internally by our company. After discussing with the project manager while going over the project plan I'd put together he said we didn't want to put any time into testing. It's not a safety critical system, it's just simply reading and analyzing data, and no one will be making any decisions on it that might affect anything because it will just be a trial concept demonstration, no one is buying it yet. Fair enough.
However, I think my manager (not prior project manager) was getting pressure to prove we're doing what we say we're doing for project review etc, because he started asking us about what testing we were doing and to record "our testing" in a spreadsheet.
There was some confusion. Me and my fellow developer were not comfortable saying we were doing any testing, formally or informally. Our manager seemed to think no testing meant we'd never run any code. We'd used the word 'test' when describing we run the code. You know what it's like, you spend 20% of your time writing some code and 80% of the time trying to work out why it wasn't running properly.
I was arguing this is not testing. My manager was saying this was testing, and if we wrote it down in a spreadsheet with a date we can prove we've done testing in reviews etc.
Cue 2 hours of argument/discussion on what 'testing' means. At the end, I was unwilling to budge and our fundamental disagreement was: When asked if we were doing testing, my answer would be no, and his yes.
I feel very uncomfortable moving from this position, my understanding is that testing has more of a formal definition in software development and saying that simply running the code was 'testing' would be misleading.
It came down to the guy questioning my experience (I've not got a CS degree) and asking if I would benefit of going on a 'course', which makes me even more uncomfortable. We've had fundamental disagreements in the past that we haven't been able to overcome.
Would you consider running code during development testing, or would saying that be misleading?
Well, what an overwhelming response, I wasn't expecting that. There seems to be more of a divide than I originally considered, with some agreeing that it shouldn't be called testing and is merely development and some saying it is just very limited testing (smoke testing coming up a lot).
Most agree that it needs to be qualified with at least some more definition, like "smoke testing" or "development testing" to avoid miscommunication.
Thanks everyone for the advice, I think the "Definition of done" that came up will be very valuable in setting expectations. I'm really not sure what answer to mark as "correct", I think I'll go with the consensus and pick corsiKa's, but I'd like to thank Kate Paulk for perhaps the most helpful regarding advice for my situation.