4 ms·
I somewhat blame this on the emphasis that now gets placed on automated testing (to the extent that nobody actually pronounces the "automated"). It's got some
by dasmoth 10y ago
I somewhat blame this on the emphasis that now gets placed on automated testing (to the extent that nobody actually pronounces the "automated"). It's got some good points, but if it comes at the expense of manual testing I'm not convinced that's always a great trade-off, especially for interactive software.
- jacalata 10y agoI don't think conflating dogfooding with manual testing really works - they are different actions and you can have a dogfood culture without manual testing, or vice versa.
- dasmoth 10y agoIf you're talking about manual testing in the sense of "run down a long checklist", yeah that's different and automated tests are a better (although still not perfect) substitute for that kind of thing. But definitely still consider dogfooding to fall under "manual testing."
- jacalata 10y agoI don't think it fits under that at all, and I find that when people do see it that way it gets an entirely different treatment. "Manual testing" is an activity you do when you are thinking about how the product works. "Dogfooding" is a culture of using the product in order to achieve other tasks that you really wanted to get done.