Software Testing Needs a Revolution – Neotys Testing Roundup

1. How Test Planning has the Upper Hand over Test Execution Phase

Software test planning reserves far better scope comparatively in STLC phase. The delivery of quality software is ensured by the testing phase. What has to be done in testing is actually decided in the test planning phase.

This tutorial will provide overview and illustrations on the importance of the test planning and the execution phase. After reading this tutorial you will understand the significant importance of the planning phase compared to the execution phase with more live examples and case studies for illustrations. Read more of the tutorial here.

2. Why Software Testing Needs a Revolution

Like every technology, software testing is also growing. As we see, nowadays, technology is evolving fast, there is a question to ask ourselves – as a tester are we growing? (Do not misunderstand this question as growing by learning 5-6 automation tools).

After spending almost a decade in the industry and observing a number of projects and technologies, I would like to claim that this is the right time for software testing to be revolutionized.

End users’ viewpoint has changed:

End users and customers are spoiled for better with multiple choices. Due to neck cutting competition, every business holder wants to have maximum customers and to attract customers or to satisfy end users, they are ready to hit any milestone, be it timeline, cost, product itself… anything.

To read more from Software Testing Help click here.

3. Test Automation Can Be So Much More…

I often hear people describe their automated test approach by naming the tool, framework, harness, technology, test runner, or structure/format. I’ve described mine the same way. It’s safe. It’s simple. It’s established. “We use Cucumber”.

Lately, I’ve seen things differently.

Instead of trying to pigeonhole each automated check into a tightly controlled format for an entire project, why not design automated checks for each story, based on their best fit for that story?

I think this notion comes from my context-driven test schooling. Here’s an example:

On my current project, we said “let’s write BDD-style automated checks”. We found it awkward to pigeonhole many of our checks into Given, When, Then. After eventually dropping the mandate for BDD-style, I discovered the not-as-natural-language style to be easier to read, more flexible, and quicker to author…for some stories. Some stories are good candidates for data-driven checks authored via Excel. Some might require manual testing with a mocked product…computer-assisted-exploratory-testing…another use of automation. Other stories might test better using non-deterministic automated diffs.

To read more from Eric Jacobson click here.

4. Considering the Value of Software Testers

Many people think software testing is just about verifying from a checklist that functions do or do not appear. But what if more testers spent time looking at the product’s behavior? Testers working with product owners, a development team, and other stakeholders can compare their understanding of the software and ask the crucial question, “Will this meet our needs?”

I try hard to learn what other people think about testing and how to do it well. In doing so, I’ve heard a variety of answers from gurus telling me what to focus on. If you’ve ever asked for guidance in your career in testing, I suspect you’ll find these ideas familiar:

  • Software testing finds bugs
  • Software testing verifies conformance to requirements
  • Software testing validates functions

There are different versions of these ideas that may be expressed in different ways. Some people focus exclusively on one item. Some will look at two. Sometimes these ideas are presented as the best way (or the “right way”) to deal with questions around testing.

To read more on the value of software testers click here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *