Michael Bolton In the last post, I talked about the asymmetry of unexpected events and the attendant problems with estimation. Today we’re going to look at some possible workarounds for the problems. Testers often start by questioning the validity of models, so let’s start there. The linear model that I’ve proposed doesn’t match reality in several ways, and so far I haven’t been very explicit about them. Here are just a few … Read more
There has been a flurry of discussion about estimation on the net in the last few months. All this reminded me to post the results of some number-crunching experiments that I started to do back in November 2009, based on a thought experiment by James Bach. That work coincided with the writing of Swan Song, a Better Software column in which I discussed The Black Swan, by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. … Read more
Lately, James Bach and I have been issuing challenges to some of our colleagues on Twitter, typically based on something they’ve said or observed. I think James would agree that the results have been very exciting. In our community, people build credibility by responding to challenges and probing the issues more deeply, and it’s been tremendous to see how some of them have risen to the challenge. For me, recent … Read more
A few months ago, James Bach introduced me to the idea of test framing. He identified it as a testing skill, and did some work in developing the concept by field-testing it with some of his online students. We’ve been refining it lately. I’ll be giving a brief talk on it at the Kitchener-Waterloo Software Quality Association on Thursday, September 30, 2010, and I’ll be leading a half-day workshop on … Read more
Let’s imagine, for a second, that you had a political problem at work. Your CEO has promised his wife that their feckless son Ambrose, having flunked his university entrance exams, will be given a job at your firm this fall. Company policy is strict: in order to prevent charges of nepotism, anyone holding a job must be qualified for it. You know, from having met him at last year’s Christmas … Read more
The post “Exploratory Testing and Review” continues to prompt comments whose responses, I think, are worthy of their own posts. Thank you to Parthi, who provides some thoughtful comments and questions. I always wondered and in attempted to see the difference between the Exploratory testing that you are talking about and the testing that I am doing. Unlike the rest of the commenter’s, this post made this question all the … Read more
In a comment on the previous post, Rahul asks, One doubt which is lingering in my mind for quite sometime now, “Can exploratory testing be automated?” There are (at least) two ways to interpret and answer that question. Let’s look first at answering the literal version of the question, by looking at Cem Kaner’s definition of exploratory testing: Exploratory software testing is a style of software testing that emphasizes the … Read more
The following is a lightly-edited version of something that I wrote on the software-testing mailing list, based on a misapprehension that we who advocate exploratory testing suggest that review or other forms of testing should be dropped. Exploratory testing was, for many years, described as “simultaneous test design, test execution, and learning”. In 2006, a few of us who have been practising and studying exploratory testing got together to exchange … Read more
A colleague wrote to me recently and asked about a problem that he’s had in hiring. He says… The kind of test engineers we’re looking for are ones that can think their way around a system and look for all the ways that things can go wrong (pretty standard, so far), and then code up a tool or system that can automatically verify that those things haven’t gone wrong (a … Read more
The Agile community (to the degree that such a thing exists at all; it’s a little like talking about “the software industry”) appears to me to be really confused about what “done” means. Whatever “done” means, it’s subject to the Relative Rule. I coined the Relative Rule, inspired by Jerry Weinberg‘s definition of quality (“quality is value to some person(s)”). The Relative Rule goes like this: For any abstract X, … Read more