Thursday, January 28, 2010
Black Viper Testing Technique
The following conversation is a copy paste from LinkedIn's Software Testing & Quality Assurance group in which I write a lot.
Senior Software Engineer - Quality Assurance from somewhere responds:
Never heard about it?I googled the term and found one helpful link. http://www.phadkeassociates.com/index_files/robusttesting.htm but Wiki doesn't have any results for it, as per me its not as concrete as other testing techniques.
and then XXX, PMP, Associate QA Manager from some_organization
Robust testing means the degree to which a software system or component can function correctly in the presence of invalid inputs or stressful environmental conditions
Sr Software QA Engg from elsehwere responds
Is it something like the stability Testing? I never heard of this terminology.
Pradeep Soundararajan : Independent Software Tester with an experience of 7 million and 4 hundred mistakes in testing responds
Same as Black Viper testing.
Labels
bad testing,
bugs,
fun,
interview,
job,
learning,
other publications,
tester
Friday, January 15, 2010
Test effort estimation: Getting it wrong before getting it right
While the world thinks test estimation is a very tough thing to do, I think, everyone gets test estimation right. The point at which they realize their estimates were wrong is the time they get the estimation right. I wish they corrected themselves. Mostly, it remains unfulfilled.
So, the deal is to communicate the number when you know you are getting it right and buy time to get it right. By "right", I mean, more meaningful than you would have when you provided an estimate even without looking at the product.
I don't know what's wrong in going wrong the first time. Most of us learned to ride a bicycle, someone did it in a day and others took a month. How would you have answered a question, how long would you take to learn to ride a bicycle? Some people might need more time to get out of the fear of falling from it and others need time to get the balance right. It varies and hence cannot be determined before even someone got on to a bicycle?
So, the deal is to communicate the number when you know you are getting it right and buy time to get it right. By "right", I mean, more meaningful than you would have when you provided an estimate even without looking at the product.
I don't know what's wrong in going wrong the first time. Most of us learned to ride a bicycle, someone did it in a day and others took a month. How would you have answered a question, how long would you take to learn to ride a bicycle? Some people might need more time to get out of the fear of falling from it and others need time to get the balance right. It varies and hence cannot be determined before even someone got on to a bicycle?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)