Disclaimer: I am not telling people how to do things. And I do not think I am “better” than anyone else on the QA Team here at Mozilla nor anywhere else. This is to bring a point of view of what I have seen and experienced. Everyone on the B2G QA team has worked hard and tried to make do with what we have. Props to Marcia and JSmith for all the hard work that they have accomplished so far in their areas. Props to TChung to holding this on top of all the other responsibilities he has. There’s not many people that are full time QA staff on the B2G project. Many of us including myself have other projects that we are working on.
I would highly suggest that you question the intent of the person who may have stated such things. Is it out of fear of something new? Or something else that is causing them to think that way?
The series that I posted also reflect a different way of doing things, as these are the things I have experienced in my QA. There are more bugs found doing more of a session based testing than in most other forms of testing. Having said that, what managers and other companies want is the proof of what is working right, not just what is not working (ie sheer number of bugs) and then there is bug quality (ie non blocking bugs versus blocking bugs). I hope to explain that this is supplementary to the traditional methods of testing as is automation.In essence, my suggestion is to do QA on session based/test-case/automation based testing. The biggest thing to keep in mind is how to split up the resource.On a side note, something to keep in mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus … as well as at one point people thought the world was flat.
The main purpose of these series of blog is to express my ideas and share them with other people so that we may collaborate them into making the QA process better for the software industry together.
Filed under: Uncategorized