Skip to main content

RTI - training for testers in Bratislava

I wanted to contribute into the testing culture of my company, so i decided to lead a training.

I was trying to condensate the Rapid Testing Intensive online 3 days course from James Bach and Michael Bolton into a 6 hour training class.

It went in my opinion quite well. I don’t want to reproduce the theory part of it, which you can see here

The practical part was more interesting, each of the participants was testing an freeware screenshot tool (which I rather don’t mention here), we were suprised how many bugs we found on an publicly used tool, some of them crashing the whole application down.

Our Mission:


Whole testing took over 2 hours and we had an interesting review session afterwards. The output of which was afterwards this Test Report.

Test Report

Results:

- The product's basic functionalities work. Non-typical scenarios produce unstable and unacceptable results,
 there are also minor bugs that are acceptable
- There are a few specific scenarios resulting to the application crash
- The application is hierarchically unintuitive in several instances
- There are indications that the portable and installed versions differ
- Mutual agreement on our recommendation -> Buy only under the condition that the known bugs are fixed and deeper testing is conducted thereafter

Testing:

- We performed paralelly 4 sanity check sessions by different testers to gain both confidence in the results and remove possible subjective factor
- Each session was 120 minutes long and a group review was following these sessions

Caveats and recommendations:

- Bug fixing followed by retesting is required
- Additional deeper testing is strongly recommended - various platforms, resolutions and monitor devices are recommended to be used
- Redesign and comprehensive manual is needed to be delivered

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

When to start automation?

If you are asking this as a tester, you probably asking too late. Automation is something that can save you some portion of your work (understand resources for your client) and i rarely found cases of testing work that did not need at least some portion of automation. I know that it is rarely understood that automation is something to be developed & maintained and if you cover enough of the application, you do not need any more regression - well i do not think that somebody has done an automation regression suite that if fully reliable (i am not speaking about maintaining this code - which is another topic). There can be always a bug (or quality issue) that slips through, even when you scripts go through the afflicted part. I understand that many testers have no development background or skills, but i doubt the developers that could help you are far away. I am not assuming that they can do the scripts for you.... However if they understand what you need, they can say how e
4 comments
Read more

Testing impact on security

... or the impact when testing is lacking? Security breaches , hacks , exploits , major ransomware attacks - their frequency seem to increase recently. These can result in financial, credibility and data loss, and increasingly the endangerment of human lives. I don't want to propose that testing will always prevent these situations. There were probably testers present (and I'm sure often also security testers) when such systems were created. I think that there was simply a general lack of risk-awareness on these projects. There are many tools and techniques from  a pure technical point of view to harden the software in security context. Some of them have automated scans which crawl through your website and might discover the low hanging fruits of security weaknesses ( ZAP , Burpsuite ...), without much technical knowledge from the person operating it. The more important aspect is however the mindset with which you approach the product. The tester is often the f
Post a Comment
Read more

RST Explored - My experience

My experience report from my recent RST Class I attended the RST class after a while, wanting to refresh my knowledge about the RST view on testing. It was a 4-day event, each day 3 Sessions, approx 4hour/day. My general impression was that it enriched and refreshed my understanding of testing.   Each of the four days had an central theme Day 1: "It is possible to test everything?" Day2: "When to stop testing? How to test from specifications." Day3: "Product coverage outline. Complexity of the system" Day4: "Risk analysis and coverage"   Going deeper into the topics of each day would be impossible without spoilers, I will therefore rather focus on my impressions and what this training has brought me. The way Michael was guiding us through the class was very engaging, although we usually started with a short lecture, questions and remarks were encouraged from start and we had an shared review after each exercise - students explaining their work,
Post a Comment
Read more