New answers tagged

2

Given that in normal (non safety-critical) software development there is usually not enough time to achieve 100% test coverage it certainly makes sense to reduce overlap between tests and focus on requirements which are not tested elsewhere. As a tester I would, all else being equal, also listen to the developers and in-depth test parts of the software they ...


1

While agreeing with the existing answers, I have a different take: In many cases, QA should be approving the test cases, ensuring that they match the actual requirements. Some kinds of requirement communication, such as behavior-driven development, try to make the written requirements as close to actual executable tests as possible, and I've successfully run ...


2

I'll assume you are keeping in mind what @PDHide said about overlapping test levels. If developers say some part of the functionality is covered by unit tests, but you keep finding bugs that show otherwise, you have proof that they should either a) repair unit tests or b) stop saying that area is covered.


11

There is no concept of overlapping testcases in different test levels, Both are completely isolated Just because API or Component works fine you cannot guarantee the whole system or integrated system works fine. Imagine all your unit tests passing but user not able to use the UI or API workflow, Imagine all your UI working due to cached information but the ...


2

What testing needs to be done is obviously dependent on the feature itself. But, I'd be finding out what unit tests have been written to see what the developers have covered as a starting point. Then, based on the feature, I'd be thinking about what else needs testing and where I can test that (e.g. integration testing or full on end-to-end testing). The ...


Top 50 recent answers are included