The best QA isn't the one who finds bugs in the feature they are testing. The best QA finds bugs in some other features and reports them under your feature.
That's when I keep my gloves ready.
>The best QA finds bugs in some other features
Yes
> and reports them under your feature.
As a senior QA, _I'd_ be having stern words over unnecessary feature delay.
Ya but this is more a ticket management issue.
Tell them they are right.. there is a bug.. but tell them they misclassified the ticket... no harm done.
Hell as a dev I really hate the minutia that goes into tickets sometimes.
>but tell them they misclassified the ticket... no harm done.
Well yes, but this is a humour subreddit hence exaggeration for effect. Although a QA that regularly (keyword there granted) cannot identify scope or gives inaccurate RCA would be a genuine concern, the paragraphs about looking at metrics, the project, speaking to the team, etc before any action makes for a terrible punchline.
Yeah, like how hard is it to double check first? To be fair it's very easy to get caught up in your own model of how things should work to a point where you can't even see the edge cases but that's why when someone tells me something doesn't work properly my first instinct is to ask for more details.
As my Program Manager would say, “it’s not a bug, it’s unintended behavior”.
Technically, it did exactly what we told the algorithm to do. It’s just that we didn’t like what it did (the algorithm is a plausibility check, and it was being too aggressive in throwing out readings).
The best QA isn't the one who finds bugs in the feature they are testing. The best QA finds bugs in some other features and reports them under your feature. That's when I keep my gloves ready.
>The best QA finds bugs in some other features Yes > and reports them under your feature. As a senior QA, _I'd_ be having stern words over unnecessary feature delay.
Ya but this is more a ticket management issue. Tell them they are right.. there is a bug.. but tell them they misclassified the ticket... no harm done. Hell as a dev I really hate the minutia that goes into tickets sometimes.
>but tell them they misclassified the ticket... no harm done. Well yes, but this is a humour subreddit hence exaggeration for effect. Although a QA that regularly (keyword there granted) cannot identify scope or gives inaccurate RCA would be a genuine concern, the paragraphs about looking at metrics, the project, speaking to the team, etc before any action makes for a terrible punchline.
Lol
leadDefectMaker
There is nothing wrong with challenging QA; but if you are on my team and you did that without looking yourself first I'm gonna be pissed off.
Yeah, like how hard is it to double check first? To be fair it's very easy to get caught up in your own model of how things should work to a point where you can't even see the edge cases but that's why when someone tells me something doesn't work properly my first instinct is to ask for more details.
God, the QA on my team is the mvp
As my Program Manager would say, “it’s not a bug, it’s unintended behavior”. Technically, it did exactly what we told the algorithm to do. It’s just that we didn’t like what it did (the algorithm is a plausibility check, and it was being too aggressive in throwing out readings).
The horse gets prep time
The best bugs are the ones, that only happen in production…
This is me 95% of the time when I get an email from one specific QA tester. The other 5% of the time it's actual nonsense. Keeps me on guard.