Re:Ask HN: Do you have a dedicated QA team?
by ccalloway on Friday March 25, 2022 @12:46PM
(#30804385)
The problem with this is that a person who makes a mistake when doing something is much more likely than someone else to make a mistake when evaluating that same piece of work.
Exactly. The problem isn't "writing tests", is writing test cases.
The really big wins happen when you get a framework in place that gives you a formal language like Gherkin for expressing what needs to be tested. That's a win because it starts giving product a way to specify requirements that are both clearer and more explicitly test-like. That starts integrating test design into the spec process as opposed to having test design happen during the implementation process.
Re:Ask HN: Do you have a dedicated QA team?
by candiddevmike on Friday March 25, 2022 @12:56PM
(#30804537)
Automated tests (at least when it comes to web) are unlikely to catch graphical and UX issues in my experience, even when you're doing screenshot comparisions--things get missed. I've also had manual QA discover unrelated UX bugs too.
I'm a big fan of a small "red team" QA approach where human testers are basically using their brains to do intelligent fuzzing and hunting for edge case breakage. That's very different from what most centralized QA teams spend their time on today.
Re:Ask HN: Do you have a dedicated QA team?
by honey-badger on Saturday March 26, 2022 @02:49AM
(#30809822)
A valuable perspective, and brilliantly articulated. The process of software creation and its quality assurance is so intricately intertwined due to the nature of software itself, that it is near impossible to neatly divide labour.
I will say however that I think you do generally still need a team (or individual at smaller shops) dedicated to tooling for automated testing to make the process of writing tests efficient for all those who are writing tests.