Tester's Musings

  thoughts on  https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ i'd agree that testing is still about artefacts and algorithms, but test cases are so pen-and-paper scripting. And maybe they are the earliest, if but the crudest manifestations of testmaping. What we once thought could be resolved by test cases, are actually more thoroughly resolved with testmapping / mapping out by scenarios. Hence i would readily junk test case logging for testmap documentation.

Personal take: when your development team (coders+testers) is small (and i mean real small, like less than 10 people), you know you got each others' backs. And so I've accepted the 'title-only-ticket' (especially one with a descriptive title), given that whoever created it can and will reliably discuss it with the group, or visually demo it, with a greater than 99% certainty of replicability. It is then up to me to docu my own understanding of the issue at hand, repeat it to them, and once agreed, my docu becomes the standard by which this issue will be judged. The above scenario mostly happens within mature teams, i guess. A most irresponsible move is to create a title-only-ticket, then halfway through your demo you can't remember the STR(steps-to-replicate) to show everyone the issue. That is an irresponsible waste of everyone's time. A team that can abbreviate it's WIP(work in progress) is a great team; after all, WIP is transient -- however we go about i...