Re: Agile Methodology
- From: "Phlip" <phlipcpp@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 14:19:11 GMT
Michael Bolton wrote:
>> > * Manual testing is not useful, and testing team should 100%
>> > automated testing?
>>
>> Any manual testing is a waste of time that should be converted to
>> automated
>> testing.
>
> It is patently absurd to make these statements
If you can't _easily_ write a new automated test for _anything_, then you
have a bigger problem than the bug you are trying to capture with a test.
> ...the original is an absurd claim for the ThoughtWorkers to
> make...
To start the coaching process, it is a rallying point. "Get ready for this
mode. Get mentally ready, now. Tests are more important than anything else,
because they are the only things that gate delivery."
Agile teams practice "Daily Deployment", which means every day. Here's a
great blog by Gunjan Doshi on the topic:
http://www.gunjandoshi.com/mtarchives/2005/05/just_another_su.html
"I have been helping this client since March of this year. Yesterday, they
achieved a major milestone - production launch. I think it is ok to classify
a system going live on budget, time and within scope as a success story.
"We all know about the last minute jobs and the ensuing stress, when the
system goes live for the first time. However, this one had a very different
feel to it - there was no anxiety at all. The system went live as per
schedule and there were no hiccups. It just seemed like any other day at
work.
"How did that happen? Well, for the past few weeks, we have been regularly
deploying the system into a simulated production environment and testing the
hell out of it. The production manager was so confident of the success that
during the release, she was in a meeting for a totally unrelated project."
The team deployed daily to a production simulation. That means absolutely no
repeated manual tests gated the deployment. They would have slowed down the
process, and would have made delivery day much more nervous.
In terms of "non-Agile" projects, what project lifecycle could possibly
sustain such bad practices as infrequent deployment and have such high odds
of success? This team
> and it's completely unsupported by evidence.
Manually test all the time. The need to do the same manual test twice is a
process smell.
> I have been working in an Agile project for some months. The products
> are well and thoughtfully developed. The programmers are highly
> capable and professional. They write unit tests, and they co-operate
> with testers by quickly and responsively writing and troubleshooting
> Fitnesse fixtures. Bugs still leak out.
Why? What practices do they follow?
> I've found a bunch of them,
> and I've found the majority of them in manual testing.
You started this entire slant by assuming "we" meant never manually operate
the program to see what it does.
Tests propel development by providing an alternate platform for such
experiments. Your project is experiencing some problem in this area; don't
blame ThoughtWorks!
--
Phlip
http://www.greencheese.org/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!
.
- References:
- Agile Methodology
- From: Colin Ren
- Re: Agile Methodology
- From: Phlip
- Re: Agile Methodology
- From: Michael Bolton
- Agile Methodology
- Prev by Date: Re: Agile Methodology
- Next by Date: Re: Acceptance testing and large test data
- Previous by thread: Re: Agile Methodology
- Next by thread: Test plan
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
