There is someone that stated that QA people should be Quality Engineering versus Quality Controlling. I firmly believe that this is the case. I think many people do.
Question: If you’re trying to assert quality into the product and not trying to control the quality towards the later half… should you be working during the Alpha/Pre-Alpha/Nightly/Sprint that the developer has access to change without needing to get a secondary authorization to push the change over?
Considering that the further along in the development cycle that you are working on, the developer needs to get authorization because changes in the builds will insert a risk in terms of stability or possibly introducing newer bugs, it’s harder to get fixes in later and later it gets. If you’re doing most of the testing down at the tail end, it seems to me that’s more of quality control.
If you do more of the testing up front, while the developer still has free reign (provided that they get past code inspection); those bugs have a greater likelihood of getting fixed, right? Of course, the developer has to have it implemented… but that’s another story.
Maybe I’m wrong?
Filed under: Uncategorized 
