3 ms·
If tests are very low quality it is the same as no tests. (so recursion here). If tests are low quality, they somehow managed to pass the code review. So, I wo
by octacat 3y ago
If tests are very low quality it is the same as no tests. (so recursion here).
If tests are low quality, they somehow managed to pass the code review. So, I would have more wider questions to the project, knowing this.
Adjusting tests require 10% during refactor? Yes, it is fine (getting some uncovered rare regression bug in prod is not fine).
Manual testing after refactor? No, it is not fine (and manual testing should be automated before the refactor. With end-to-end/integration testing. In the ideal world).
Sadly, it all depends on managers, many projects are just "Just doo it", so nobody cares about keeping the tests sane.
Oh yea, flaky, weird, non-documented tests would increase load by 40% to the new devs and that is true evil.
- MoreQARespect 3y ago>If tests are low quality, they somehow managed to pass the code review. So, I would have more wider questions to the project, knowing this. The answer to this is almost always a lack of skill or that the team was focused on delivery and were willing to neglect test quality in pursuit of that goal. Either way it's a common enough situation that can't just be handwaved away. Even if you've fired the team members responsible for that code the code doesnt just go away.