Comments on PRACTICAL QA: THAT’S THE WAY (UH-HUH, UH-HUH) I LIKE IT

I too am utterly bored of this particular "co...

2009-09-24T14:12:27.216-04:00

I too am utterly bored of this particular "controversy." I'm a nobody in the testing world, and honestly, I like it that way. I do my job, do it well, and am compensated handsomely for it. So I risk nothing by saying that I read Michael's blog, and most of what he writes makes me think he spends a LOT of time thinking about "schools" and "theories" and "disciplines," and not much time actually testing or dealing with stakeholders.

There's more I want to say, but it's not particularly polite, so I'll leave it at that. Because my mama raised me right, that's why! ;-)

I do enjoy your blog. Please post more often.

I never mentioned the term "regression testin...

2009-09-22T08:49:40.883-04:00

I never mentioned the term "regression testing" in my post (quite deliberately), and I was wondering if someone else would. I find it interesting that you did.

The term "check" is going to be confusing. To "check" can mean to investigate or test; not the definition the authors of this brouhaha were looking for, I think.

I don't think I view "checking", as it has been defined, the same way that you do. Regression testing would, to me, be a check. If a change/fix/enhancement came in that required an original test(s) be modified, I would no longer consider that a "regression test" and it would not, therefore, be a "check".

My perception of the term "check" is also somewhat broader than others; I can see cases where new, functional "testing" could also be considered "checks". I can think of several conversion projects I've worked on where this would have been the case.

As far as automation goes, the very nature of automated tests makes them "checks". I find nothing new in this concept. I believe creating those tests is a significantly cerebral activity, but the actual running of them; well, not. That's the reason we automate them in the first place. So human beings aren't wasting their time and brainpower on something better served by a machine.

I think the testing effort, with functional, regression, and automated tests, represents both "testing" and "checking"; I'm not sure I'd break down regression testing specifically into "testing" and "checking". For me, regression tests represent "been there, done that". Functional tests require investigation, analysis, and more of my attention.

I can't believe I'm even talking about this; I normally don't get involved in terminology discussions. They make me want to bang my head against a wall until my brains leak out my ears. Maybe that's the real meaning of "blowing one's mind".

Regardless, I can't really see any benefit to the concept, other than to add another term that everyone will interpret differently to a field that already has too much of that problem.

Thanks for the posts; agree or disagree, you certainly got me involved in spite of myself!

- Linda

Actually,thinking about it, I disagree with you on...

2009-09-21T16:51:09.501-04:00

Actually,thinking about it, I disagree with you on this one Linda.

Regression testing requires combination of testing and checking.

First you 'check' the fix is made, and then you 'test' the application. In this way, I do see a difference to what you've written.

Michael also discusses automated testing and describes this as checking. I think that is a new concept too.

Hi Linda, I have to say when i read Michael Bolto...

2009-09-21T16:30:23.810-04:00

Hi Linda,

I have to say when i read Michael Bolton's post of testing vs checking, I thought it was insightful. I liked the way it distinguished between the two.

I have no problem identifying with both types testing and checking and quite happily use both on a client assignment.

However, I find myself agreeing with you too! I can quite clearly see the similarities to 'regression testing' and checking and I wonder if this is not just a rehash.

So, I don't know where this leaves me. Either I am easily swayed or perhaps there is validity in what both you and michael write.

Anne-Marie
http://mavericktester

Linda, I wish you'd get off the fence and say ...

2009-09-21T15:52:23.024-04:00

Linda, I wish you'd get off the fence and say what you really mean ;-)

Nice.

I haven't stopped examining this topic, yet (although it gains less of my attention span just now), but my initial trigger for looking was "if it's not broken why fix it?" - ie, what's the root problem here... I suspect that root problem might not be anything more than communication (handling and talking about those different strategies to teams, stakeholders, etc.)