Software Quality Assurance

The idea behind behavior driven development is that testers are able to verify the product, prevent bugs and reduce cost. Because the product is built using coding practices that put testing upfront in the process.  This is supposed to accelerate deployment and maintain the quality of software products by allowing software developers engineers in test (SDETs) to build frameworks to verify the behavior defined by product owners and developed by software engineers.    So why is it that the more automated tests we build the more they fail, the more maintenance they have and ultimately creating noise in our quality metrics; reliability, maintainability, usability, security and so on:  Software engineers build software and are not particularly good at writing tests.  Product owners and manual testers do not read code they read natural language  The more the product evolves the more complex the testing framework the more likely the tests are going to require...

 Do you have a manager, leader, or coach?  Can you tell the difference and why does that matter? 

 Purpose  Autonomy  Learning 

 I heard about this a couple years ago, (see link below) and it has changed the way I think about my QA environments.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWgq6sd1Ols Which do you prefer and/or are you doing both?  What tools are you using to build it out?  Docker Kubernetes  Tugboat   

 Simply put, it is the right thing to do. I also has the added benefit of quality. 

 Engineers are not great testers QA is naturally collaborative; we can't work if nothing is engineered  Accessibility  

    Agile Test Strategy Big picture (ten words or less to speak to what this is that we are testing) Drive behavior and set testing boundaries Outline automation approach (typically executed after end-to-end testing) Test data management (need to have clean data or will any data do?) Test data should be re-usable and accessible in non-production environments Collaborate with your data Team and Engineering Team Defect management UAT bug definition as agreed on by Product QA bug Create a ‘Bug’ and link to the story that the bug has been found in Communicate to the Product owner for priority and assignment   When a bug is blocking a ticket, send an email to all stake holder stating so Bugs ought to be resolved in the same sprint or carried over into the next sprint with the relative ticket  If the bug is NOT resolved and the ticket needs to move to Production then we will put it in the backlog and label with #techdebt Large risks to our product quality Our mindset is on...