4 ms·
The same way we expect "QA" to pick up those bugs before release? Think about the opposite. Imagine we pickup a bug in a live application and update it citing
by zo1 3y ago
The same way we expect "QA" to pick up those bugs before release?
Think about the opposite. Imagine we pickup a bug in a live application and update it citing "our QA standards". This magical word does not absolve us of the fact that we let a bug through to production. And it's implied that we'll do better next time to pick up this kind of bug.
- embik 3y agoThe post you are responding to is making the point that even though we have QA, dedicated jobs or even departments for these things … We, as a profession, still fail in releasing bug-free software. And that’s 100% correct. Is that really something you are challenging? Which pieces of popular software you can think of are bug-free? And are you thinking of more than a handful?
- zo1 3y agoThey said "So when a journalist notices a bug in their article and has to "retract a release", how is that not what we do every single day?" And they themselves were responding to someone criticizing media for using "editorial standards" as an excuse when they "retract a release". And I explained how we are the same and supposedly strive to not release bad content/software, we just don't get to magically absolve fault with an excuse that "it doesn't meet our QA standards" as an analogy to "editorial standards". Anywho, the whole thing breaks down when we have to beat it with a stick. It's a discussion, assume a charitable interpretation.