3 ms·
Wherever I worked so far as a software developer we had the QA department very close. In the same room or next door. They were there from the beginning until th
by andix 5y ago
Wherever I worked so far as a software developer we had the QA department very close. In the same room or next door. They were there from the beginning until the end, tested our software continuously.
If we developed something, that was hard for them to test or to understand, they gave us a hard time. So we tried to make software testable. Do meaningful logging. Make things repeatable. Develop tools to export state/parts of the database, that can be restored. So you can actually test one feature and don't have to do 100 steps every time you need to test Feature X.
All that also greatly helped the developers, because a lot of companies develop software, that the developers can't even try out, because it only runs in a QA system they don't have access to. That's horrible.
- indogooner 5y agoThis has been my experience as well. The places where testing was an afterthought meant the software was not testable easily. Executing multiple steps to test one feature meant QA folks kept running into one or other service issues causing delay in bug discovery. Rather than giving time to devs for fixing this, the management put more devs on test writing and were more interested in looking at dashboards.
- andix 5y agoI've seen this behaviour in outsourced software development. In the end they had 10 times the people they would actually need on projects. And they were mostly trapped inside deadlocks and doing nothing. Just like if you try to parallelize a single threaded application without redesigning it. Just multiplying the core count of the CPU by 10 may bring you a few percent increase in speed, but nowhere close to the expected +1000%.