>I am currently the test manager for an enterprise system. We test every >functional requirement. In attributes with a fixed number of values, we >test each variation and check for expected results. Tests are mapped to >one or more requirements and vice-versa. For each test misstep, I write >a test deficiency 'report' that includes the test number to aid in >retesting and I track them. I must be able to show status, by >requirement and by test. Not easy/cheap/quick, but surprises are get >increasingly rare every time we deploy.
But that is oh so hard. It gives me a headache just thinking about doing so much work. The less we test the more we save and the happier will our shareholders be. And happy shareholders means that we won't get any crap when we pay ourselves big bonuses. Your way of thinking is so outmoded and a menace to the resort island I'm buying for my new mansion. (No, I don't remember how many mansions I own. Ask my staff. They get paid to count.) And I don't buy your bull about testing being a way to reduce support costs. Our Cambodian tech support center is so much more economical than then one we just closed in India. I know that our deal to have calls taken by political prisoners in Guantánamo didn't work out, but we have a firm lead on jailed Tibetan protesters. I think we can have them do our product testing too. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
