Don't know if what is stated below is something that you are considering, so let me give you my 2 cents.
1) NO 2) NO But seriously here are some of the reasons that will cause you issues Privacy. If you have a separate environment with production data, you MAYBE in jeopardy of contravening some privacy laws. Also the increased risk of a data breach, given that normally these type of environments are not as secure as production. (you may have people outside the normal process accessing the data, and thus needing a more 'open' access rules). No one wants to be in the front page of the WSJ. 70% of data breaches are NON malicious in nature. QA function is not the same as UAT. UAT is for the 'power user' to 'check out' the changes and make sure everything new works as expected. They have the knowledge of the business rules that are inherent within the application. Developers know the CODE and thus it is not the same thing. QA can/should be used for regression testing. (making sure all the critical process work). UAT can/should be used to check the business rules to make sure they work as they should. Weather the new/changed functionality. At times they may seem similar, but in realty are not. The people involved are not the same either, nor is their experience/knowledge. A Automated testing vehicle (a process where critical repeatable tests can be done to verify that all critical process within the application con't to work no matter what should also be considered). More info contact me offline, Robert Galambos CIPP/C CIPP/IT Compuware Senior Technical Specialist IBM Certified Solutions Expert - DB2 UDB for OS/390 Database Administration Certified Information Privacy Professional/Canada Certified Information Privacy Professional/Information Technology [email protected] BLOG: blog.compuware.com Tel: +1 905 886 7000 Toll Free: +1 800 263 7189 Fax: +1 905 886 7023 Quebec: +1 877-281-1888 Compuware Canada Service is our best product The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of George Henke Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 12:18 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: UAT Best Practices The best place is production - there you have all the data. The best team to do it is Development team - they know better how to use it; this is also the reason why no technical documentation is needed. There should be no separate QA environment and separate team. <g> Funny ? I heard some of the statements above. Spoken seriously Robert: Don't Why not? You don't have to create test data, you're working with live data, the real thing, you're testing security at the same time, and there is no migration or cutover needed, you're already there. One of my clients once said this facetiously. We both had a good laugh, but there is some truth to it. ;-) On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 11:33 AM, R.S. <[email protected]>wrote: > George Henke pisze: > > Would someone please tell me what is "best practices" as to where most > of >> the User Acceptance Testing (UAT) should take place? >> >> 1) In the developers' Integration Testing environment and conducted >> by developers >> 2) In the Quality Assuarnce (QA) environment and conducted by QA >> analysts Also where should final user signoff occur? >> > > > The best place is production - there you have all the data. The best > team to do it is Development team - they know better how to use it; > this is also the reason why no technical documentation is needed. > There should be no separate QA environment and separate team. <g> > > Funny ? I heard some of the statements above. Spoken seriously. > OK, IMHO UAT should be conducted *before* QA. The environmnet could be > the same as UAT, but it could lead to bottlenecks - one team waits for > another. > IMHO it shouldn't be Integration Testing env. because of bottlenecks > too, even stronger. > Obviously UATs are done by the users, but watch details - who is a > user of batch? Who's responsible for checking performance? > YMMV > > -- > Radoslaw Skorupka > Lodz, Poland > > > -- > BRE Bank SA > ul. Senatorska 18 > 00-950 Warszawa > www.brebank.pl > > S d Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego > Rejestru S dowego, nr rejestru przedsi biorców KRS 0000025237 > NIP: 526-021-50-88 > Wed ug stanu na dzie 01.01.2009 r. kapita zak adowy BRE Banku SA (w > ca o ci wp acony) wynosi 118.763.528 z otych. W zwi zku z realizacj > warunkowego podwy szenia kapita u zak adowego, na podstawie uchwa y > XXI WZ z dnia 16 marca 2008r., oraz uchwa y XVI NWZ z dnia 27 pa > dziernika 2008r., mo e ulec podwy szeniu do kwoty 123.763.528 z . > Akcje w podwy szonym kapitale zak adowym BRE Banku SA b d w ca o ci op acone. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html > -- George Henke (C) 845 401 5614 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
