Is testing just testing?

Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

scriptfromscratch replied

20 November 2006, 18:10
penetration cleaners
Leave a comment:
Sockpuppet replied

20 November 2006, 18:03
Originally posted by scriptfromscratch

people keep telling me "testing is testing" i've always argued against this and fought the technical specialst tester coner.

My defences are weakening should I just give up and accept "testing is testing"?

Anything is anything.

There are always "specialists" in any field and there is nothing as a "just anything" job. Even cleaners have specialist cleaners that normal cleaners couldnt do.
Leave a comment:
scriptfromscratch replied

20 November 2006, 17:20
penetration testing hehehe
Leave a comment:
DeadKenny replied

19 November 2006, 13:43
As a developer, I'd say developer testing is a different thing entirely, but important if done right.

My last job involved an Agile development methodology and a key part of that is test driven development, essentially with unit testing. I really got to like it and would now always try to take a TTD approach with unit tests that run as part of the build where possible.

It doesn't eliminate testing but it helps make more robust code and perhaps help remove the mundane part of testing. It also helps provide more confidence to 'testers' who don't trust anything a developer writes

Though methodologies like Agile dispense with official roles such as developer and tester, but then again the person with the skills is more likely to take the tasks relevant to them. Not sure about Extreme programming though where a developer and tester may sit together on the same piece of code.

We did struggle a lot introducing Agile when people wanted to hang on to the whole concept of a independent test department and a waterfall process.
Leave a comment:
meridian replied

16 November 2006, 12:16
Originally posted by scriptfromscratch

people keep telling me "testing is testing" i've always argued against this and fought the technical specialst tester coner.

My defences are weakening should I just give up and accept "testing is testing"?

I won this argument when one of our developers decided he'd do a bit of testing. No test plan, no test results, no release note, no SOx compliance, and it was a complete balls-up. The whole lot had to be done again.
Leave a comment:
scriptfromscratch started a topic Is testing just testing?

16 November 2006, 11:44
Is testing just testing?

people keep telling me "testing is testing" i've always argued against this and fought the technical specialst tester coner.

My defences are weakening should I just give up and accept "testing is testing"?
Tags: None