canmove, Confirmed users
2,041
edits
B2G/QA/Automation/UI/Strategy/Integration vs End to end: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
B2G/QA/Automation/UI/Strategy/Integration vs End to end (view source)
Revision as of 03:44, 11 February 2015
, 11 February 2015→Ownership and Overlap
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
Ownership is separated because these differences can lead to variant needs in terms of breadth and depth of verification. | Ownership is separated because these differences can lead to variant needs in terms of breadth and depth of verification. | ||
In addition, tests can and should overlap between CI and UAT as it is unacceptable for QA to expect developers to always consult their needs and vice versa. If the suites are united, it's all too easy for one group to make a change that damages the purpose of the other. For acceptance, in particular, this is too risky. | In addition, tests can and should overlap between CI and UAT as it is unacceptable process complication for QA to expect developers to always consult their needs and vice versa. If the suites are united, it's all too easy for one group to make a change that damages the purpose of the other. For acceptance, in particular, this is too risky. | ||
Of course, each group should have an opinion on coverage for either suite, and can (and should) help expand each suite, but single point of ownership allows decisions to be made quickly as appropriate for each set of primary stakeholders. | Of course, each group should have an opinion on coverage for either suite, and can (and should) help expand each suite, but single point of ownership allows decisions to be made quickly as appropriate for each set of primary stakeholders. | ||