3 ms·
These are all just excuses, and common ones at that. Think of it this way: * The test cases written by the some guy who left the company are now your test case
by tacostakohashi 8y ago
These are all just excuses, and common ones at that. Think of it this way:
* The test cases written by the some guy who left the company are now your test cases.
* Before he left the company, he was able to commit the test cases, passing whatever review / quality processes were put in place by the company (or that the company failed to put in place).
* If your team wants to have the benefit of reliable testcases, the knot needs to be untangled. That doesn't entail "dropping everything" (although perhaps thats the only way your organization knows how to operate), there is no reason that improving test cases can't be prioritized alongside and in the context of other work.
Unfortunately, in my experience it's usually the last bullet point where things fall down. Product owners consistently pressure development teams to deliver features now, and do test cases later, which means never.
- JoeAltmaier 8y agoIts all about competition. You move fast and deliver rapidly, or get left behind. Time is actually money, for an engineer at least. So unless those tests are needed now, it always seems better to de-prioritize them.
- SpicyLemonZest 8y agoThe last bullet point often should fall down. There are a lot of tests that aren’t worth the effort of making them run reliably, but most organizations have (understandably) strong norms against fixing a failing test by removing it.