|
|
Forum Overview
::
NetHack
|
|
|
by A MYSTERY SHOPPER 04/17/2013, 9:17pm PDT |
|
 |
|
 |
|
Fullofkittens wrote:
I've kinda been tasked with figuring out how to bridge the gap between our nontechnical QA and our devs so that we can increase the scope of our test automation and release more often.
To that end I'm giving a talk tomorrow about BDD frameworks (Cucumber and SpecFlow) with the goal of trying to use the BDD frameworks as a point of collaboration where the nontechnical QA can at least participate and describe what they want automated and the devs can make it happen.
I would rather see QA learn how to automate shit on their own but they've been kind of resistant to the idea of... learning things.
Any experiences?
We have manual and automated testers where I work. The manual testers are open to automating things somewhat. They will have Selenium running while they use the app we make and generate test cases in Java that way for the automators to refine. They will create FitNesse pages if everything on the back-end is done for them.
But here is the part I can't stand about Acceptance Test Driven Design.
When I first started we had two automation engineers, me and this other person. The other automator quickly fell behind. She would start making these stupid test cases in Fitnesse that ended up having nothing to do with how the app actually exported data. So she would throw all that away and start over when the feature was actually finished. I looked at this as a complete waste of time. She could have been doing a million other things that would be useful in the time she took to make those stupid pages in the name of test-driven design.
They are really banging that drum. A test before the feature is done. It's stupid to me. You know what, you can maybe do it if you are tweaking behavior in something that already exists. "A non-admin user can do a certain thing, write a test that will "pass" when they can no longer do that thing." Sure. But it never works for totally new things. I think the entire concept of taking people who are busy at work and making them do work that is thrown away and THEN the real test is wasteful. Plus, nobody documents anything and we don't have specs. I hope that things are more sane where you are.
I don't know how helpful this is, I mostly just wanted to vent. It sounds like you have a lot of manual stuff in place and the manual testers are happy to continue the only life they have known? Is that a good way to put it? I mean, I should clarify: I think that ATDD is a waste of time as-is. It is the IDEAL way to create software if it worked. I am hoping to have my opinion changed.
(You all know who this is.) |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Caltrops, please share your experiences with BDD or ATDD by Fullofkittens 04/17/2013, 4:37pm PDT 
My experience: none by Entropy Stew 04/17/2013, 9:15pm PDT 
Pretend that "doesn't" wasn't there NT by Entropy Stew 04/17/2013, 9:16pm PDT 
Re: Caltrops, please share your experiences with BDD or ATDD by A MYSTERY SHOPPER 04/17/2013, 9:17pm PDT 
This doesn't match my concept of ATDD or how I'm trying to apply it by Fullofkittens 04/18/2013, 4:25pm PDT 
Re: Caltrops, please share your experiences with BDD or ATDD by E. L. Koba 04/17/2013, 9:45pm PDT 
Re: Caltrops, please share your experiences with BDD or ATDD by A MYSTERY SHOPPER 04/17/2013, 9:54pm PDT 
Re: Caltrops, please share your experiences with BDD or ATDD by E. L. Koba 04/18/2013, 1:50pm PDT 
The issue is that we don't have enough automators to go around by Fullofkittens 04/18/2013, 4:32pm PDT 
My knee-jerk reaction: JUSTIFIED by Entropy Stew 04/17/2013, 11:11pm PDT 
Re: My knee-jerk reaction: JUSTIFIED by E. L. Koba 04/18/2013, 1:54pm PDT 
Re: My knee-jerk reaction: JUSTIFIED by Fullofkittens 04/18/2013, 4:35pm PDT 
Re: Caltrops, please share your experiences with BDD or ATDD by motherfuckerfoodeater 04/18/2013, 10:03am PDT 
Re: Caltrops, please share your experiences with BDD or ATDD by Fullofkittens 04/18/2013, 5:33pm PDT 
|
|
|
|
|