Quotes About Testing

Trust energizes participants. We feel good when things work smoothly. We need to be safe to experiment and make mistakes. We need testing to bring accountability to our experimentation so that we can be sure we are doing no harm.

To achieve this his team had a sophisticated stress testing environment. When they wanted to improve the architecture they would first improve the stress tests until the system broke. Then they would improve the architecture just enough to run the tests. I suggested this strategy to an architect at another company. He complained of spending all of his time writing specifications and then explaining them to developers.

Listening , Testing , Coding , Designing. That's all there is to software. Anyone who tells you different is selling something .

Write tests until fear is transformed into boredom

If you're happy slamming some code together that more or less works and you're happy never looking at the result again, TDD is not for you. TDD rests on a charmingly naïve geekoid assumption that if you write better code, you'll be more successful. TDD helps you to pay attention to the right issues at the right time so you can make your designs cleaner, you can refine your designs as you learn.

Beta testing is a symptom of weak testing practices and poor communication with customers.

If there are forms of testing, like stress and load testing, that find defects after development is "complete," bring them into the development cycle. Run load and stress tests continuously and automatically.

Testing leads to failure, and failure leads to understanding.

Courage is not simply one of the virtues but the form of every virtue at the testing point, which means at the point of highest reality.

Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.

Faith is tested when we are confronted by difficulties. But that's also when our faith grows stronger.

The character doesn't even come out until people are tested and be put in extreme situations and most people spend their lives trying to avoid those kinds of situations.

Design for 80 percent and build separate paths for exceptions. Eliminate or reduce the impact of low-value steps. Simplify complex steps. Combine simple steps. Work to design quality into the work, rather than inspect step outputs after the fact. Use parallel paths wherever possible. Broaden job content and empower employees. Don't design things to the task level unless the risk of variation is unacceptable and you're willing to invest in testing prior to implementation.

If you can't out-experiment and beat your competitors in time to market and agility, you are sunk. Features are always a gamble. If you're lucky, ten percent will get the desired benefits. So the faster you can get those features to market and test them, the better off you'll be. Incidentally, you also pay back the business faster for the use of capital, which means the business starts making money faster, too.

I've seen this movie before. The plot is simple: First, you take an urgent date-driven project, where the shipment date cannot be delayed because of external commitments made to Wall Street or customers. Then you add a bunch of developers who use up all the time in the schedule, leaving no time for testing or operations deployment. And because no one is willing to slip the deployment date, everyone after Development has to take outrageous and unacceptable shortcuts to hit the date.

There should be absolutely no way that the Dev and QA environments don't match the production environment.

Without automated testing, continuous integration is the fastest way to get a big pile of junk that never compiles or runs correctly.

In our world, Development and IT Operations are adversaries; testing and Infosec activities happen only at the end of a project, too late to correct any problems found; and almost any critical activity requires too much manual effort and too many handoffs, leaving us to always be waiting.

When Dev teams had problems with testing or deployment, they needed more than just technology or environments. What they also needed was help and coaching. At first, we embedded Ops engineers and architects into each of the Dev teams, but there simply weren't enough Ops engineers to cover that many teams. We were able to help more teams with what we called an Ops liaison model and with fewer people.

Even high-profile product and feature releases become routine by using dark launch techniques. Long before the launch date, we put all the required code for the feature into production, invisible to everyone except internal employees and small cohorts of real users, allowing us to test and evolve the feature until it achieves the desired business goal.

They start making a list: Every developer uses a common build environment. Every developer is supported by a continuous build and integration system. Everyone can run their code in production-like environments. Automated test suites are built to replace manual testing, liberating QA people to do higher value work. Architecture is decoupled to liberate feature teams, so developers can deliver value independently. All the data that teams need is put in easily consumed APIs

To have humans executing tests that should be automated is a waste of human potential.

Instead, code is only "done" when it has been fully tested and is operating in production as designed. (Note

a joke: "A QA engineer walks into a bar. Orders a beer. Orders zero beers. Orders 999,999,999 beers. Orders a lizard. Orders negative one beer. Orders a 'sfdeljknesv.