Perhaps, I did not communicate my position clearly enough.
I agree that it is reasonable for there to be people on teams whose primary job is to test and others whose primary job is to implement code, although I so believe that everybody on an agile team should be able to do something other than their specialty when doing so helps the team deliver value.
My point was rather that in Agile, the broader QA role (defined in the posting I was responding to as: "to analyze the flow of the project and ensure quality of the project deliverable") should be fulfilled by the entire team rather than any specific individuals. My interpretation was that this means ensuring that the team was doing things in the way which delivers the best quality, not catching specific software defects.
Perhaps, the confusion is the word "project". I interpreted "project" in the broadest possible way (the whole mission, team and its entire context), whereas the poster and others may be interpreting project to narrowly mean just the code base (i.e., what an IDE defines as a project).
SteveG
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Gustavo Cebrian Garcia <g.cebrian.garcia@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
I can not say that defining the role of a Test Analyst is a bad idea, as DSDM does, is a good idea. I have seen teams not caring about the Quality because this role is not defined. However, I see your point Steve.So, should we say that it depends on the team?Having said that, just becasue there are responsabilities, does not mean that the whole team has to help each other.Using Kanban can be good for this.What do you think about this.Gustavo.On 7 January 2012 18:31, karthikeyan M <gotukarthik@yahoo.com> wrote:
IMO: The whole team philosophy I personally feel is only a philosophy.. there are issues like a Developer cannot be an effective QA and the reverse is true as well. Though each one can play the other person's role but not efficiently. So having a full time QA who can think in terms of a Developer , BA is more helpful. And yes I agree that the whole team is responsible for the quality of their deliverable.
-
Regards
M.Karthikeyan
Mob# 99008 44443
From: Steven Gordon <sgordonphd@gmail.com>
To: agile-testing@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 7 January 2012 2:37 AM
Subject: Re: [agile-testing] Re: What is the difference between QA and Test?
In Agile, the whole team is responsible for this. Having any particular person officially fulfill this role dilutes that responsibility. It might seem more effective to have such a role in the short term, but it would erode agility in the long term.So, while QA still exists under Agile as a responsibility, QA should be a shared, collaborative, continuous responsibility not a role that specific people play at specific points in time and others do not.SteveGOn Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 1:43 PM, karthikeyan M <gotukarthik@yahoo.com> wrote:
Personally I feel QA -> Quality Analyst -> means a person whose job role is is to analyze the flow of the project and ensure quality of the project deliverable. The deliverable could be Production Code, Unit/Integration Test Code, Functional Test Code, Any documentation like Release Notes etc... There are also other deliverables like Stories written for every iteration, and those stories should be reviewed by the QA to ensure there is no functional Gap's (sometimes BAs might miss to add an acceptance criteria). Now to emphasize Quality in all these places, the QA can chose to use any appropriate method to achieve the same. When he tests the application to ensure the production code is of good quality, he is referred to as a tester but Philosophically the job doesn't end only with that.- Karthik
__._,_.___
MARKETPLACE
.
__,_._,___
