Testing Terminology

**barrydidit** · 10 February 2016, 08:35

Originally posted by original PM View Post

Well I thought I would post this in general for the fun of the responses but it is a serious question too!

Currently we are working on a large development and currently in the first test phase.

It has transpired that the data schema we were given for the data transfers was wrong and so needs to be redeveloped.

However on the test plan it is showing as 'Blocked' by oPMco - my view is that it is not blocked at all - it is in rework because the requirements we got were wrong.

I do not like the word 'blocked' as it implies a conscious effort to not get things working.

Am I just being overly sensitive on the terminology or do I have a point - generally because the exec's at the top reading the test reports will just see the oPMco have blocked a test.

Any idea's or comments?

tia

ideas

Sounds like you've found a defect to me. Good testing! Awards all round!

**SimonMac** · 10 February 2016, 08:55

The only other option would be to fail the test which again would look bad on you, blocked has less negative connotations, and suggests it is looking to be addressed.

Once failed its then upto you as to whether you want them to raise a CR to change the requirements as the defect is as designed.

**FatLazyContractor** · 10 February 2016, 08:58

Originally posted by original PM View Post

However on the test plan it is showing as 'Blocked' by oPMco - my view is that it is not blocked at all - it is in rework because the requirements we got were wrong.

Is the PM a permie? or another contractor?

That would be my starting point

**VectraMan** · 10 February 2016, 09:03

Fire all the testers and you won't have these problems.

**original PM** · 10 February 2016, 09:15

Originally posted by SimonMac View Post

The only other option would be to fail the test which again would look bad on you, blocked has less negative connotations, and suggests it is looking to be addressed.

Once failed its then upto you as to whether you want them to raise a CR to change the requirements as the defect is as designed.

Well you could argue the test passed - in that we created the extract in the agreed format and sent it to the relevant system.

It failed to load into that system as the format we had extracted the data into - whilst correct based on the requirements - was incorrect as it would not load into the recipient system.

So oPMco systems have done exactly what has been asked of them.

Not that fussed - it is just a clear attempt by tuliplibra to cover up their inability to get a lot of people in a place full of beer drunk.

**original PM** · 10 February 2016, 09:17

Originally posted by FatLazyContractor View Post

Is the PM a permie? or another contractor?

That would be my starting point

Just to humour you they are all from a large consultancy...

does that make a difference?

**LondonManc** · 10 February 2016, 09:18

Originally posted by original PM View Post

Well you could argue the test passed - in that we created the extract in the agreed format and sent it to the relevant system.

It failed to load into that system as the format we had extracted the data into - whilst correct based on the requirements - was incorrect as it would not load into the recipient system.

So oPMco systems have done exactly what has been asked of them.

Not that fussed - it is just a clear attempt by tuliplibra to cover up their inability to get a lot of people in a place full of beer drunk.

Correct.

Test passed. It ran to spec.

You could argue that it has passed unit testing but failed SIT.
Root cause analysis would show that it was specified incorrectly; the quality of the spec should be flagged, rather than the inability of the developers to deliver accurately.

**DodgyAgent** · 10 February 2016, 10:08

Do you need any tester?

I have six of them available

**SimonMac** · 10 February 2016, 10:14

Originally posted by original PM View Post

Well you could argue the test passed - in that we created the extract in the agreed format and sent it to the relevant system.

It failed to load into that system as the format we had extracted the data into - whilst correct based on the requirements - was incorrect as it would not load into the recipient system.

So oPMco systems have done exactly what has been asked of them.

Not that fussed - it is just a clear attempt by tuliplibra to cover up their inability to get a lot of people in a place full of beer drunk.

Depends, are they testing against what was designed or what they expect to happen? Are the test cases approved and signed off?

Testing Terminology