Skip to main content

I Done the Ton


This is the 100th post on Hiccupps.

I started the blog just under two years ago with the self-challenge of writing 50 posts in a year and a manifesto of sorts:

  • to blog primarily about testing and related areas
  • to explore and document my thinking
  • to try to offer something different from other blogs
  • to be truthful
  • to write well
  • to be myself ...
  • ... but not come across as (too much of) a pretentious or pompous pillock
  • to protect the confidentiality of my company, customers and colleagues, where mentioned
  • to have the freedom to write anything I want to, within the other constraints

I was inspired most directly by Abakas and QA Hates You which were both being updated frequently, spoke with a distinctive voice and were provocative in their own separate ways. Catherine Powell would frequently cover topics away from testing, with an eye to making a point relevant to it and always clearly from a practitioner's perspective. Brian Noggle's persona was - and is - more aggressive and humourous, frequently using examples of failure to make his points but again with practical experience backing him up.

I'd been a tester - and test manager - for a handful of years by then. As usual in start-ups, I'd done all sorts of stuff prior to that, including software development, web sites, marketing, pre-sales, training, IT, technical support and tea boy. When we started the company part of my work was in Java development because we decided to implement a rich UI in that language. So I learned Java on the job (with no commercial programming experience, Prolog was my "best" language at that point) and then discovered how I like to to (try to) manage people, projects, infrastructure and the rest by building up the Dev team over the following years.

As time went by the company grew, the codebase grew, the product grew, our customer base grew and our bug database got gruesome. It became clear that we needed to do something less ad hoc in testing and we recruited a Dev manager while I started a test team from scratch.

Researching background material, the first book I bought was Lessons Learned in Software Testing. Wow. So many of my intuitions about how I felt I wanted to test were being described and many pits I might otherwise have fallen into were being signposted. We have a couple of copies of the book in our company library and I recommend it to all new members of the test team and developers who ask. I still dip into it and, when I do, frequently find some nugget of information that's relevant to what I'm doing right there and then.

As I got more experienced I started to think more deeply about what I was doing and how I was doing it and tried to tease out where my actions, intuitions, ideas and mistakes were coming from. Then I wondered whether there might be value in sharing those thoughts. Personally, I wanted to make them coherent enough that I could express them reliably. For others, I hoped to provide a resource; not Thomas' Golden Laws of Testing, but one man's take on stuff that has mattered to, bears on or came out of his time spent testing software.

I'd like to think I've achieved what I set out to. I managed 50 posts in that first year and the centennial's arriving just before the second anniversary. Reading back over earlier posts I'd probably change a few things if I was going to start them now but by and large I'm happy they stick to the manifesto. Colleagues recognise me in the writing and noting now how often it seems that I've mentioned cups of tea, referenced musicians and wedged in an excruciating phonetic gag, I recognise myself too.

Trying to post around once a week has been a useful discipline. If nothing else it's motivational. I've managed to carve out time even when life and work have been hectic and I've improved my productivity both in writing the posts and in the writing I need to do day-to-day.

It should be no surprise that trying to get a thought out in a form someone else can understand forces you to clarify your own understanding, but it's perpetually interesting to me how much the idea I'm trying to express can have its resolution increased - not to mention its core components adjusted - trying to blog about it. Paul Heaton of the Housemartins put it brilliantly, for the parallel case of song writing:
"And then it's like doing a really difficult crossword. The thing is to get the first clue – that's when you realise what this song is going to become. It's going to be something good, because you realise for the first time that, for the whole of your life, you've held opinions about this subject. And that's a really enjoyable part of the job."
I've found that I learned a lot from just researching statements or implicit assumptions that I've made in the first draft of a post. I'm also not too proud to say that I've learned a lot about testing from my colleagues. Developers and testers coming from other companies, with longer experience than me in and around testing, have given me approaches, heuristics, resources, technology, ideas and more that I've absorbed into my own work and attitude.

I've uncovered (to myself) that I'm very interested in value, efficiency (particularly of communication and collaboration), sharing, thinking before acting, idea generationmaximising my own skills, trying to show that testers are not islands and more. I already knew that I loved wordplay, and tea.

I'm really enjoying the act of writing, and of finding images that suit the post, with some often tangential reference which I hope readers might notice in their peripheral vision. In fact, trying to inject these has given some insight into how to spot them, and by extension is a good exercise in looking for unexpected connections, unintended consequences, unwanted associations and so on in the day job.

It looks like others might be seeing some of the value I'd hoped for too: the readership is increasing (according to Blogger's numbers) and I've had interesting discussions with other testers on the back of the blog, I'm approaching 300 followers on Twitter (still can't believe that many people care, even at the low-level approximation to caring that following implies) and I've been asked to contribute to the Testing Planet, which I've done a couple of times so far.

There's a sidebar on the full version of this page that shows the current most popular posts as judged by readers, but here's some I found I was particularly happy with when reading them back this week:

  • Drawing Conclusions: because analogy can be a powerful tool and because it illustrates (for me, anyway) how testing is part of life, which people often seem to forget
  • Dev Ice Manager: because of the audacious title and because it's transcribed almost verbatim
  • Test Automation is not Automated Testing: because of the material it covers and the testers who collaborated on it
  • Setting the Quality: because the idea likely wouldn't have come to me if I hadn't been blogging
  • Ask a Stupid Equestrian: because it's an attempt to engage non-testers and feedback from workmates suggests that it worked

And so what next? Well, why stop when I'm having pun?
Image: http://flic.kr/p/6f6sXg

Comments

  1. Congrats on making 100, looking forward to 100 more

    Sounds like you've got a lot out of blogging, so have I, more people should do it

    ReplyDelete
  2. Congratulations for 100th post. What about getting the 101th published in Testing Circus magazine?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Can Code, Can't Code, Is Useful

The Association for Software Testing is crowd-sourcing a book,  Navigating the World as a Context-Driven Tester , which aims to provide  responses to common questions and statements about testing from a  context-driven perspective . It's being edited by  Lee Hawkins  who is  posing questions on  Twitter ,   LinkedIn , Mastodon , Slack , and the AST  mailing list  and then collating the replies, focusing on practice over theory. I've decided to  contribute  by answering briefly, and without a lot of editing or crafting, by imagining that I'm speaking to someone in software development who's acting in good faith, cares about their work and mine, but doesn't have much visibility of what testing can be. Perhaps you'd like to join me?   --00-- "If testers can’t code, they’re of no use to us" My first reaction is to wonder what you expect from your testers. I am immediately interested in your working context and the way

Testing (AI) is Testing

Last November I gave a talk, Random Exploration of a Chatbot API , at the BCS Testing, Diversity, AI Conference .  It was a nice surprise afterwards to be offered a book from their catalogue and I chose Artificial Intelligence and Software Testing by Rex Black, James Davenport, Joanna Olszewska, Jeremias Rößler, Adam Leon Smith, and Jonathon Wright.  This week, on a couple of train journeys around East Anglia, I read it and made sketchnotes. As someone not deeply into this field, but who has been experimenting with AI as a testing tool at work, I found the landscape view provided by the book interesting, particularly the lists: of challenges in testing AI, of approaches to testing AI, and of quality aspects to consider when evaluating AI.  Despite the hype around the area right now there's much that any competent tester will be familiar with, and skills that translate directly. Where there's likely to be novelty is in the technology, and the technical domain, and the effect of

Testers are Gate-Crashers

  The Association for Software Testing is crowd-sourcing a book,  Navigating the World as a Context-Driven Tester , which aims to provide  responses to common questions and statements about testing from a  context-driven perspective . It's being edited by  Lee Hawkins  who is  posing questions on  Twitter ,   LinkedIn , Mastodon , Slack , and the AST  mailing list  and then collating the replies, focusing on practice over theory. I've decided to  contribute  by answering briefly, and without a lot of editing or crafting, by imagining that I'm speaking to someone in software development who's acting in good faith, cares about their work and mine, but doesn't have much visibility of what testing can be. Perhaps you'd like to join me?   --00-- "Testers are the gatekeepers of quality" Instinctively I don't like the sound of that, but I wonder what you mean by it. Perhaps one or more of these? Testers set the quality sta

Am I Wrong?

I happened across Exploratory Testing: Why Is It Not Ideal for Agile Projects? by Vitaly Prus this week and I was triggered. But why? I took a few minutes to think that through. Partly, I guess, I feel directly challenged. I work on an agile project (by the definition in the article) and I would say that I use exclusively exploratory testing. Naturally, I like to think I'm doing a good job. Am I wrong? After calming down, and re-reading the article a couple of times, I don't think so. 😸 From the start, even the title makes me tense. The ideal solution is a perfect solution, the best solution. My context-driven instincts are reluctant to accept the premise, and I wonder what the author thinks is an ideal solution for an agile project, or any project. I notice also that I slid so easily from "an approach is not ideal" into "I am not doing a good job" and, in retrospect, that makes me smile. It doesn't do any harm to be reminded that your cognitive bias

Play to Play

I'm reading Rick Rubin's The Creative Act: A Way of Being . It's spiritual without being religious, simultaneously vague and specific, and unerring positive about the power and ubiquity of creativity.  We artists — and we are all artists he says — can boost our creativity by being open and welcoming to knowledge and experiences and layering them with past knowledge and experiences to create new knowledge and experiences.  If that sounds a little New Age to you, well it does to me too, yet also fits with how I think about how I work. This is in part due to that vagueness, in part due to the human tendency to pattern-match, and in part because it's true. I'm only about a quarter of the way through the book but already I am making connections to things that I think and that I have thought in the past. For example, in some ways it resembles essay-format Oblique Strategy cards and I wrote about the potential value of them to testers 12 years ago. This week I found the f

Meet Me Halfway?

  The Association for Software Testing is crowd-sourcing a book,  Navigating the World as a Context-Driven Tester , which aims to provide  responses to common questions and statements about testing from a  context-driven perspective . It's being edited by  Lee Hawkins  who is  posing questions on  Twitter ,   LinkedIn , Mastodon , Slack , and the AST  mailing list  and then collating the replies, focusing on practice over theory. I've decided to  contribute  by answering briefly, and without a lot of editing or crafting, by imagining that I'm speaking to someone in software development who's acting in good faith, cares about their work and mine, but doesn't have much visibility of what testing can be. Perhaps you'd like to join me?   --00-- "Stop answering my questions with questions." Sure, I can do that. In return, please stop asking me questions so open to interpretation that any answer would be almost meaningless and certa

Test Now

The Association for Software Testing is crowd-sourcing a book,  Navigating the World as a Context-Driven Tester , which aims to provide  responses to common questions and statements about testing from a  context-driven perspective . It's being edited by  Lee Hawkins  who is  posing questions on  Twitter ,   LinkedIn , Mastodon , Slack , and the AST  mailing list  and then collating the replies, focusing on practice over theory. I've decided to  contribute  by answering briefly, and without a lot of editing or crafting, by imagining that I'm speaking to someone in software development who's acting in good faith, cares about their work and mine, but doesn't have much visibility of what testing can be. Perhaps you'd like to join me?   --00-- "When is the best time to test?" Twenty posts in , I hope you're not expecting an answer without nuance? You are? Well, I'll do my best. For me, the best time to test is when there

Rage Against the Machinery

  I often review and collaborate on unit tests at work. One of the patterns I see a lot is this: there are a handful of tests, each about a page long the tests share a lot of functionality, copy-pasted the test data is a complex object, created inside the test the test data varies little from test to test. In Kotlin-ish pseudocode, each unit test might look something like this: @Test fun `test input against response for endpoint` () { setupMocks() setupTestContext() ... val input = Object(a, OtherObject(b, c), AnotherObject(d)) ... val response = someHttpCall(endPoint, method, headers, createBodyFromInput(input) ) ... val expected = Object(w, OtherObject(x, y), AnotherObject (z)) val output = Object(process(response.getField()), otherProcess(response.getOtherField()), response.getLastField()) assertEquals(expected, output) } ... While these tests are generally functional, and I rarely have reason to doubt that they

A Qualified Answer

The Association for Software Testing is crowd-sourcing a book,  Navigating the World as a Context-Driven Tester , which aims to provide  responses to common questions and statements about testing from a  context-driven perspective . It's being edited by  Lee Hawkins  who is  posing questions on  Twitter ,   LinkedIn ,   Slack , and the AST  mailing list  and then collating the replies, focusing on practice over theory. I've decided to  contribute  by answering briefly, and without a lot of editing or crafting, by imagining that I'm speaking to someone in software development who's acting in good faith, cares about their work and mine, but doesn't have much visibility of what testing can be. Perhaps you'd like to join me?   --00-- "Whenever possible, you should hire testers with testing certifications"  Interesting. Which would you value more? (a) a candidate who was sent on loads of courses approved by some organisation you don't know and ru

README

    This week at work my team attended a Myers Briggs Type Indicator workshop. Beforehand we each completed a questionnaire which assigned us a personality type based on our position on five behavioural preference axes. For what it's worth, this time I was labelled INFJ-A and roughly at the mid-point on every axis.  I am sceptical about the value of such labels . In my less charitable moments, I imagine that the MBTI exercise gives us each a box and, later when work shows up, we try to force the work into the box regardless of any compatiblity in size and shape. On the other hand, I am not sceptical about the value of having conversations with those I work with about how we each like to work or, if you prefer it, what shape our boxes are, how much they flex, and how eager we are to chop problems up so that they fit into our boxes. Wondering how to stretch the workshop's conversational value into something ongoing I decided to write a README for me and