At CEWT #6 we used Lean Coffee as a way to reflect on some of the threads we'd discussed during the day. Here's a few brief, aggregated comments and questions that came up.
- Claire and Helen's talk was about how the testers and test manager on a project had a very different view on the quality of the testing.
- The developer perspective is also interesting, and often different.
- Whose needs are being met by the testing?
- Which lens are we looking through: experience, knowledge, context, ..?
- Good testing is inherently perspective-based.
- The relative rule.
- What about outside of software, e.g. in laboratory science?
- Stop Working and Start Thinking.
What makes good tests?
- Consistent, deterministic, a specific outcome.
- What about if the software is non-deterministic?
- Isn't testing about information?
- Is gathering data (e.g. performance data) testing?
- There needs to be a pass/fail.
- Is the tester the best person to judge pass/fail?
- A good test gives actionable information.
- A good test has a mission.
- A good test has to answer a question.
- A good test has to be fun to run.
Is good testing perpetual?
- If testing was thought to be good when you did it, does it remain good?
- If testing was thought to be bad when you did it, does it remain bad?
- Be wary of hindsight bias.
- The context can change and more information can be available later on.
- Testing needs to be judged in the context in which it was done.
- Perhaps our standards have changed.
- Is it ever fair to compare X then to Y now?
- Requirements change.
- Regression suites must evolve.
- I wouldn't want to work in an environment where testing stagnated
- I don't want to work on a production line.
- Stand up for your (past) testing.
- Impostor syndrome.
- I won't compare myself to someone else.
- There's more than one way to do good testing.