Software QA and Testing skill

Software QA and Testing Tools Info

2009-11-10T22:17:00.005-05:00

Change and Configuration Managament Tools - Part of the CM Wiki site with information about CM that includes tools listings based on the former CM Yellow Pages. Also links to information about CM, Build Management, Change Management, and concepts, templates, and processes. (Also see CM Crossroads , an online community and resource center for configuration management, with library of resource links, interactive discussion forums, monthly newsletter, Career Search and Jobs Board.)

CM & Problem Management FAQ/Tools Lists - Comprehensive resource for Configuration Management and Problem Management and related tools. Includes tool descriptions and reviews, FAQ's, links to related web sites. Based on the FAQ from usenet news group comp.software.config-mgmt. Has not been updated for some time, but still has much useful information.
Test Tools List - Extensive test tools list maintained by Danny Faught; listings and summaries of various types of test tools, and links to their web sites.
Web Site Test/Management Tools List - SoftwareQATest.com's listing of more than 420 web site test and management tools. Load testing tools, HTML validators, security test tools, link checkers, site mapping tools, site monitoring services, open source tools, functional and regression test tools, site administration and maintenance tools, version control, java test tools, log analysis tools, site monitoring services, etc.
Open source software testing tools - Listing of more than 400 open source test tools (of all types, not just for web testing) in various categories including functional testing, java testing, perfomance testing, test management, bug tracking, unit testing, and more.

What's the best approach to software test estimation?

2009-11-10T22:12:00.004-05:00

There is no simple answer for this. The 'best approach' is highly dependent on the particular organization and project and the experience of the personnel involved.

For example, given two software projects of similar complexity and size, the appropriate test effort for one project might be very large if it was for life-critical medical equipment software, but might be much smaller for the other project if it was for a low-cost computer game. A test estimation approach that only considered size and complexity might be appropriate for one project but not for the other.

Following are some approaches to consider:
Implicit Risk Context Approach: A typical approach to test estimation is for a project manager or QA manager to implicitly use risk context, in combination with past personal experiences in the organization, to choose a level of resources to allocate to testing. In many organizations, the 'risk context' is assumed to be similar from one project to the next, so there is no explicit consideration of risk context. (Risk context might include factors such as the organization's typical software quality levels, the software's intended use, the experience level of developers and testers, etc.) This is essentially an intuitive guess based on experience.

Metrics-Based Approach: A useful approach is to track past experience of an organization's various projects and the associated test effort that worked well for projects. Once there is a set of data covering characteristics for a reasonable number of projects, then this 'past experience' information can be used for future test project planning. (Determining and collecting useful project metrics over time can be an extremely difficult task.) For each particular new project, the 'expected' required test time can be adjusted based on whatever metrics or other information is available, such as function point count, number of external system interfaces, unit testing done by developers, risk levels of the project, etc. In the end, this is essentially 'judgement based on documented experience', and is not easy to do successfully.

Test Work Breakdown Approach: Another common approach is to decompose the expected testing tasks into a collection of small tasks for which estimates can, at least in theory, be made with reasonable accuracy. This of course assumes that an accurate and predictable breakdown of testing tasks and their estimated effort is feasible. In many large projects, this is not the case. For example, if a large number of bugs are being found in a project, this will add to the time required for testing, retesting, bug analysis and reporting. It will also add to the time required for development, and if development schedules and efforts do not go as planned, this will further impact testing.

Iterative Approach:In this approach for large test efforts, an initial rough testing estimate is made. Once testing begins, a more refined estimate is made after a small percentage (eg, 1%) of the first estimate's work is done. At this point testers have obtained additional test project knowledge and a better understanding of issues, general software quality, and risk. Test plans and schedules can be refactored if necessary and a new estimate provided. Then a yet-more-refined estimate is made after a somewhat larger percentage (eg, 2%) of the new work estimate is done. Repeat the cycle as necessary/appropriate.

Percentage-of-Development Approach: Some organizations utilize a quick estimation method for testing based on the estimated programming effort. For example, if a project is estimated to require 1000 hours of programming effort, and the organization normally finds that a 40% ratio for testing is appropriate, then an estimate of 400 hours for testing would be used. This approach may or may not be useful depending on the project-to-project variations in risk, personnel, types of applications, levels of complexity, etc.

Successful test estimation is a challenge for most organizations, since few can accurately estimate software project development efforts, much less the testing effort of a project. It is also difficult to attempt testing estimates without first having detailed information about a project, including detailed requirements, the organization's experience with similar projects in the past, and an understanding of what should be included in a 'testing' estimation for a project (functional testing? unit testing? reviews? inspections? load testing? security testing?)

With agile software development approaches, test effort estimations may be unnecessary if pure test-driven development is utilized. However, it is not uncommon to have a mix of some automated positive-type unit tests, along with some type of separate manual or automated functional testing. In general, agile-based projects by their nature will not be heavily dependent on large one-shot testing efforts, since they emphasize the construction of releasable software in very short iteration cycles. These smaller multiple test effort estimates may not be as difficult to estimate and the impact of inaccurate estimates will be less severe.

How can it be determined if a test environment is appropriate?

2009-11-10T22:11:00.004-05:00

This is a difficult question in that it typically involves tradeoffs between 'better' test environments and cost. The ultimate situation would be a collection of test environments that mimic exactly all possible hardware, software, network, data, and usage characteristics of the expected live environments in which the software will be used. For many software applications, this would involve a nearly infinite number of variations, and would clearly be impossible. And for new software applications, it may also be impossible to predict all the variations in environments in which the application will run. For very large, complex systems, duplication of a 'live' type of environment may be prohibitively expensive.

In reality judgements must be made as to which characteristics of a software application environment are important, and test environments can be selected on that basis after taking into account time, budget, and logistical constraints. Such judgements are preferably made by those who have the most appropriate technical knowledge and experience, along with an understanding of risks and constraints.

For smaller or low risk projects, an informal approach is common, but for larger or higher risk projects (in terms of money, property, or lives) a more formalized process involving multiple personnel and significant effort and expense may be appropriate.

In some situations it may be possible to mitigate the need for maintenance of large numbers of varied test environments. One approach might be to coordinate internal testing with beta testing efforts. Another possible mitigation approach is to provide built-in automated tests that run automatically upon installation of the application by end-users. These tests might then automatically report back information, via the internet, about the application environment and problems encountered. Another possibility is the use of virtual environments instead of physical test environments, using such tools as VMWare or VirtualBox.

What's the best way to choose a test automation tool?

2009-11-10T22:06:00.007-05:00

It's easy to get caught up in enthusiasm for the 'silver bullet' of test automation, where the dream is that a single mouse click can initialize thorough unattended testing of an entire software application, bugs will be automatically reported, and easy-to-understand summary reports will be waiting in the manager's in-box in the morning.

Although that may in fact be possible in some situations, it is not the way things generally play out. In manual testing, the test engineer exercises software functionality to determine if the software is behaving in an expected way. This means that the tester must be able to judge what the expected outcome of a test should be, such as expected data outputs, screen messages, changes in the appearance of a User Interface, XML files, database changes, etc. In an automated test, the computer does not have human-like 'judgement' capabilities to determine whether or not a test outcome was correct. This means there must be a mechanism by which the computer can do an automatic comparison between actual and expected results for every automated test scenario and unambiguously make a pass or fail determination. This factor may require a significant change in the entire approach to testing, since in manual testing a human is involved and can:

make mental adjustments to expected test results based on variations in the pre-test state of the software system
often make on-the-fly adjustments, if needed, to data used in the test
make pass/fail judgements about results of each test
make quick judgements and adjustments for changes to requirements.
make a wide variety of other types of judgements and adjustments as needed.

For those new to test automation, it might be a good idea to do some reading or training first. There are a variety of ways to go about doing this; some example approaches are:

Read through information on the web about test automation such as general information available on some test tool vendor sites or some of the automated testing articles listed in the Automation section.
Read some books on test automation such as those listed in the Refence Books.
Obtain some test tool trial versions or low cost or open source test tools and experiment with them
Attend software testing conferences or training courses related to test automation

As in anything else, proper planning and analysis are critical to success in choosing and utilizing an automated test tool. Choosing a test tool just for the purpose of 'automating testing' is not useful; useful purposes might include: testing more thoroughly, testing in ways that were not previously feasible via manual methods (such as load testing), testing faster, or reducing excessively tedious manual testing. Automated testing rarely enables savings in the cost of testing, although it may result in software lifecycle savings (or increased sales) just as with any other quality-related initiative.

With the proper background and understanding of test automation, the following considerations can be helpful in choosing a test tool (automated testing will not necessarily resolve them, they are only considerations for automation potential):

Analyze the current non-automated testing situation to determine where testing is not being done or does not appear to be sufficient
Where is current testing excessively time-consuming?
Where is current testing excessively tedious?
What kinds of problems are repeatedly missed with current testing?
What testing procedures are carried out repeatedly (such as regression testing or security testing)?
What testing procedures are not being carried out repeatedly but should be?
What test tracking and management processes can be implemented or made more effective through the use of an automated test tool?

Taking into account the testing needs determined by analysis of these considerations and other appropriate factors, the types of desired test tools can be determined. For each type of test tool (such as functional test tool, load test tool, etc.) the choices can be further narrowed based on the characteristics of the software application. The relevant characteristics will depend, of course, on the situation and the type of test tool and other factors. Such characteristics could include the operating system, GUI components, development languages, web server type, etc. Other factors affecting a choice could include experience level and capabilities of test personnel, advantages/disadvantages in developing a custom automated test tool, tool costs, tool quality and ease of use, usefulness of the tool on other projects, etc.

Once a short list of potential test tools is selected, several can be utilized on a trial basis for a final determination. Any expensive test tool should be thoroughly analyzed during its trial period to ensure that it is appropriate and that it's capabilities and limitations are well understood. This may require significant time or training, but the alternative is to take a major risk of a mistaken investment.

Will automated testing tools make testing easier?

2009-11-10T21:58:00.002-05:00

Possibly. For small projects, the time needed to learn and implement them may not be worth it unless personnel are already familiar with the tools. For larger projects, or on-going long-term projects they can be valuable.
A common type of automated tool is the 'record/playback' type. For example, a tester could click through all combinations of menu choices, dialog box choices, buttons, etc. in an application GUI and have them 'recorded' and the results logged by a tool. The 'recording' is typically in the form of text based on a scripting language that is interpretable by the testing tool. Usually the recorded script is manually modified and enhanced. If new buttons are added, or some underlying code in the application is changed, etc. the application might then be retested by just 'playing back' the 'recorded' actions, and comparing the logging results to check effects of the changes. The problem with such tools is that if there are continual changes to the system being tested, the 'recordings' may have to be changed so much that it becomes very time-consuming to continuously update the scripts.

Additionally, interpretation and analysis of results (screens, data, logs, etc.) can be a difficult task. Note that there are record/playback tools for text-based interfaces also, and for all types of platforms.
Another common type of approach for automation of functional testing is 'data-driven' or 'keyword-driven' automated testing, in which the test drivers are separated from the data and/or actions utilized in testing (an 'action' would be something like 'enter a value in a text box'). Test drivers can be in the form of automated test tools or custom-written testing software. The data and actions can be more easily maintained - such as via a spreadsheet - since they are separate from the test drivers. The test drivers 'read' the data/action information to perform specified tests. This approach can enable more efficient control, development, documentation, and maintenance of automated tests/test cases.
Other automated tools can include:
code analyzers
coverage analyzers
memory analyzers
load/performance test tools
web test tools
other tools

Test automation is, of course, possible without COTS tools. Many successful automation efforts utilize custom automation software that is targeted for specific projects, specific software applications, or a specific organization's software development environment. In test-driven agile software development environments, automated tests are often built into the software during (or preceding) coding of the application.

What if an organization is growing so fast that fixed QA processes are impossible?

2009-11-10T21:57:00.001-05:00

This is a common problem in the software industry, especially in new technology areas. There is generally no easy solution in this situation. One approach is:

Hire good people
Management should 'ruthlessly prioritize' quality issues and maintain focus on the customer
Everyone in the organization should be clear on what 'quality' means to the customer

Depending on the growth rate, it is possible that incremental self-managed team approaches may be applicable, such as 'Kaizen' methods of continuous process improvement, or the Deming-Shewhart Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle, and others.

What if the application has functionality that wasn't in the requirements?

2009-11-10T21:56:00.005-05:00

It may take serious effort to determine if an application has significant unexpected or hidden functionality, and it could indicate deeper problems in the software development process. If the functionality isn't necessary to the purpose of the application, it should be removed, as it may have unknown impacts or dependencies that were not taken into account by the designer or the customer. (If the functionality is minor and low risk then no action may be necessary.) If not removed, information will be needed to determine risks and to determine any added testing needs or regression testing needs. Management should be made aware of any significant added risks as a result of the unexpected functionality.

This problem is a standard aspect of projects that include COTS (Commercial Off-The-Shelf) software or modified COTS software. The COTS part of the project will typically have a large amount of functionality that is not included in project requirements, or may be simply undetermined. Depending on the situation, it may be appropriate to perform in-depth analysis of the COTS software and work closely with the end user to determine which pre-existing COTS functionality is important and which functionality may interact with or be affected by the non-COTS aspects of the project. A significant regression testing effort may be needed (again, depending on the situation), and automated regression testing may be useful.

How can Software QA processes be implemented without reducing productivity?

2009-11-10T21:56:00.003-05:00

By implementing QA processes slowly over time, using consensus to reach agreement on processes, focusing on processes that align tightly with organizational goals, and adjusting/experimenting/refactoring as an organization matures, productivity can be improved instead of stifled. Problem prevention will lessen the need for problem detection, panics and burn-out will decrease, and there will be improved focus and less wasted effort. At the same time, attempts should be made to keep processes simple and efficient, avoid a 'Process Police' mentality, minimize paperwork, promote computer-based processes and automated tracking and reporting, minimize time required in meetings, and promote training as part of the QA process. However, no one - especially talented technical types - likes rules or bureaucracy, and in the short run things may slow down a bit. A typical scenario would be that more days of planning, reviews, and inspections will be needed, but less time will be required for late-night bug-fixing and handling of irate customers.
Other possibilities include incremental self-managed team approaches such as 'Kaizen' methods of continuous process improvement, the Deming-Shewhart Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle, and others.

What can be done if requirements are changing continuously?

2009-11-10T21:53:00.001-05:00

This is a common problem for organizations where there are expectations that requirements can be pre-determined and remain stable. If these expectations are reasonable, here are some approaches:

Work with the project's stakeholders early on to understand how requirements might change so that alternate test plans and strategies can be worked out in advance, if possible.
It's helpful if the application's initial design allows for some adaptability so that later changes do not require redoing the application from scratch.
If the code is well-commented and well-documented this makes changes easier for the developers.
Use some type of rapid prototyping whenever possible to help customers feel sure of their requirements and minimize changes.
The project's initial schedule should allow for some extra time commensurate with the possibility of changes.
Try to move new requirements to a 'Phase 2' version of an application, while using the original requirements for the 'Phase 1' version.
Negotiate to allow only easily-implemented new requirements into the project, while moving more difficult new requirements into future versions of the application.
Be sure that customers and management understand the scheduling impacts, inherent risks, and costs of significant requirements changes. Then let management or the customers (not the developers or testers) decide if the changes are warranted - after all, that's their job.
Balance the effort put into setting up automated testing with the expected effort required to refactor them to deal with changes.
Try to design some flexibility into automated test scripts.
Focus initial automated testing on application aspects that are most likely to remain unchanged.
Devote appropriate effort to risk analysis of changes to minimize regression testing needs.
Design some flexibility into test cases (this is not easily done; the best bet might be to minimize the detail in the test cases, or set up only higher-level generic-type test plans)
Focus less on detailed test plans and test cases and more on ad hoc testing (with an understanding of the added risk that this entails).

If this is a continuing problem, and the expectation that requirements can be pre-determined and remain stable is NOT reasonable, it may be a good idea to figure out why the expectations are not aligned with reality, and to refactor an organization's or project's software development process to take this into account. It may be appropriate to consider agile development approaches.

Who should decide when software is ready to be released?

2009-11-10T21:49:00.002-05:00

In many projects this depends on the release criteria for the software. Such criteria are often in turn based on the decision to end testing, discussed in FAQ2 item "How can it be known when to stop testing?" Unfortunately, for any but the simplest software projects, it is nearly impossible to adequately specify useful criteria without a significant amount of assumptions and subjectivity. For example, if the release criteria is based on passing a certain set of tests, there is likely an assumption that the tests have adequately addressed all appropriate software risks. For most software projects, this would of course be impossible without enormous expense, so this assumption would be a large leap of faith. Additionally, since most software projects involve a balance of quality, timeliness, and cost, testing alone cannot address how to balance all three of these competing factors when release decisions are needed.

A typical approach is for a lead tester or QA or Test manager to be the release decision maker. This again involves significant assumptions - such as an assumption that the test manager understands the spectrum of considerations that are important in determining whether software quality is 'sufficient' for release, or the assumption that quality does not have to be balanced with timeliness and cost. In many organizations, 'sufficient quality' is not well defined, is extremely subjective, may have never been usefully discussed, or may vary from project to project or even from day to day.

Release criteria considerations can include deadlines, sales goals, business/market/competitive considerations, business segment quality norms, legal requirements, technical and programming considerations, end-user expectations, internal budgets, impacts on other organization projects or goals, and a variety of other factors. Knowledge of all these factors is often shared among a number of personnel in a large organization, such as the project manager, director, customer service manager, technical lead or manager, marketing manager, QA manager, etc. In smaller organizations or projects it may be appropriate for one person to be knowledgeable in all these areas, but that person is typically a project manager, not a test lead or QA manager.

For these reasons, it's generally not a good idea for a test lead, test manager, or QA manager to decide when software is ready to be released. Their responsibility should be to provide input to the appropriate person or group that makes a release decision. For small organizations and projects that person could be a product manager, a project manager, or similar manager. For larger organizations and projects, release decisions might be made by a committee of personnel with sufficient collective knowledge of the relevant considerations.

Who is responsible for risk management?

2009-11-10T21:47:00.001-05:00

Risk management means the actions taken to avoid things going wrong on a software development project, things that might negatively impact the scope, quality, timeliness, or cost of a project. This is, of course, a shared responsibility among everyone involved in a project. However, there needs to be a 'buck stops here' person who can consider the relevant tradeoffs when decisions are required, and who can ensure that everyone is handling their risk management responsibilities.

It is not unusual for the term 'risk management' to never come up at all in a software organization or project. If it does come up, it's often assumed to be the responsibility of QA or test personnel. Or there may be a 'risks' or 'issues' section of a project, QA, or test plan, and it's assumed that this means that risk management has taken place.

The issues here are similar to those for the FAQ3 question "Who should decide when software is ready to be released?" It's generally NOT a good idea for a test lead, test manager, or QA manager to be the 'buck stops here' person for risk management. Typically QA/Test personnel or managers are not managers of developers, analysts, designers and many other project personnel, and so it would be difficult for them to ensure that everyone on a project is handling their risk management responsibilities. Additionally, knowledge of all the considerations that go into risk management mitigation and tradeoff decisions is rarely the province of QA/Test personnel or managers. Based on these factors, the project manager is usually the most appropriate 'buck stops here' risk management person. QA/Test personnel can, however, provide input to the project manager. Such input could include analysis of quality-related risks, risk monitoring, process adherence reporting, defect reporting, and other information.

Why is it often hard for organizations to get serious about quality assurance?

2009-11-10T21:44:00.001-05:00

Solving problems is a high-visibility process; preventing problems is low-visibility. This is illustrated by an old parable:In ancient China there was a family of healers, one of whom was known throughout the land and employed as a physician to a great lord. The physician was asked which of his family was the most skillful healer.

He replied,
"I tend to the sick and dying with drastic and dramatic treatments, and on occasion someone is cured and my name gets out among the lords."
"My elder brother cures sickness when it just begins to take root, and his skills are known among the local peasants and neighbors."
"My eldest brother is able to sense the spirit of sickness and eradicate it before it takes form. His name is unknown outside our home."

This is a problem in any business, but it's a particularly difficult problem in the software industry. Software quality problems are often not as readily apparent as they might be in the case of an industry with more physical products, such as auto manufacturing or home construction.

Additionally: Many organizations are able to determine who is skilled at fixing problems, and then reward such people. However, determining who has a talent for preventing problems in the first place, and figuring out how to incentivize such behavior, is a significant challenge.

What is Extreme Programming and what's it got to do with testing?

2009-11-10T21:42:00.005-05:00

Extreme Programming (XP) is a software development approach for small teams on risk-prone projects with unstable requirements. It was created by Kent Beck who described the approach in his book 'Extreme Programming Explained'. Testing ('extreme testing') is a core aspect of Extreme Programming. Programmers are expected to write unit and functional test code first - before writing the application code. Test code is under source control along with the rest of the code. Customers are expected to be an integral part of the project team and to help develope scenarios for acceptance/black box testing. Acceptance tests are preferably automated, and are modified and rerun for each of the frequent development iterations. QA and test personnel are also required to be an integral part of the project team. Detailed requirements documentation is not used, and frequent re-scheduling, re-estimating, and re-prioritizing is expected. For more info on XP and other 'agile' software development approaches (Scrum, Crystal, etc.)

How is testing affected by object-oriented designs?

2009-11-10T21:42:00.004-05:00

Well-engineered object-oriented design can make it easier to trace from code to internal design to functional design to requirements. While there will be little affect on black box testing (where an understanding of the internal design of the application is unnecessary), white-box testing can be oriented to the application's objects. If the application was well-designed this can simplify test design.

How can World Wide Web sites be tested?

2009-11-10T21:38:00.001-05:00

Web sites are essentially client/server applications - with web servers and 'browser' clients. Consideration should be given to the interactions between html pages, web services, encrypted communications, Internet connections, firewalls, applications that run in web pages (such as javascript, flash, other plug-in applications), the wide variety of applications that could run on the server side, etc. Additionally, there are a wide variety of servers and browsers, various versions of each, small but sometimes significant differences between them, variations in connection speeds, rapidly changing technologies, and multiple standards and protocols. The end result is that testing for web sites can become a major ongoing effort. Other considerations might include:

What are the expected loads on the server (e.g., number of hits per unit time?), and what kind of performance is required under such loads (such as web server response time, database query response times). What kinds of tools will be needed for performance testing (such as web load testing tools, other tools already in house that can be adapted, load generation appliances, etc.)?
Who is the target audience? What kind and version of browsers will they be using, and how extensively should testing be for these variations? What kind of connection speeds will they by using? Are they intra- organization (thus with likely high connection speeds and similar browsers) or Internet-wide (thus with a wide variety of connection speeds and browser types)?
What kind of performance is expected on the client side (e.g., how fast should pages appear, how fast should flash, applets, etc. load and run)?
Will down time for server and content maintenance/upgrades be allowed? how much?
What kinds of security (firewalls, encryption, passwords, functionality, etc.) will be required and what is it expected to do? How can it be tested?
What internationilization/localization/language requirements are there, and how are they to be verified?
How reliable are the site's Internet connections required to be? And how does that affect backup system or redundant connection requirements and testing?
What processes will be required to manage updates to the web site's content, and what are the requirements for maintaining, tracking, and controlling page content, graphics, links, etc.?
Which HTML and related specification will be adhered to? How strictly? What variations will be allowed for targeted browsers?
Will there be any standards or requirements for page appearance and/or graphics throughout a site or parts of a site?
Will there be any development practices/standards utilized for web page components and identifiers, which can significantly impact test automation.
How will internal and external links be validated and updated? how often?
Can testing be done on the production system, or will a separate test system be required?
How are browser caching, variations in browser option settings, connection variabilities, and real-world internet 'traffic congestion' problems to be accounted for in testing?
How extensive or customized are the server logging and reporting requirements; are they considered an integral part of the system and do they require testing?
How are flash, applets, javascripts, ActiveX components, etc. to be maintained, tracked, controlled, and tested?

How does a client/server environment affect testing?

2009-11-10T21:37:00.001-05:00

Client/server applications can be quite complex due to the multiple dependencies among clients, data communications, hardware, and servers, especially in multi-tier systems. Thus testing requirements can be extensive. When time is limited (as it usually is) the focus should be on integration and system testing. Additionally, load/stress/performance testing may be useful in determining client/server application limitations and capabilities. There are commercial tools to assist with such testing.

What if the project isn't big enough to justify extensive testing?

2009-11-10T21:35:00.002-05:00

Consider the impact of project errors, not the size of the project. However, if extensive testing is still not justified, risk analysis is again needed and the same considerations as described previously in 'What if there isn't enough time for thorough testing?' apply. The tester might then do ad hoc testing, or write up a limited test plan based on the risk analysis.

What if there isn't enough time for thorough testing?

2009-11-10T21:34:00.001-05:00

Use risk analysis, along with discussion with project stakeholders, to determine where testing should be focused.Since it's rarely possible to test every possible aspect of an application, every possible combination of events, every dependency, or everything that could go wrong, risk analysis is appropriate to most software development projects. This requires judgement skills, common sense, and experience. (If warranted, formal methods are also available.) Considerations can include:

Which functionality is most important to the project's intended purpose?
Which functionality is most visible to the user?
Which functionality has the largest safety impact?
Which functionality has the largest financial impact on users?
Which aspects of the application are most important to the customer?
Which aspects of the application can be tested early in the development cycle?
Which parts of the code are most complex, and thus most subject to errors?
Which parts of the application were developed in rush or panic mode?
Which aspects of similar/related previous projects caused problems?
Which aspects of similar/related previous projects had large maintenance expenses?
Which parts of the requirements and design are unclear or poorly thought out?
What do the developers think are the highest-risk aspects of the application?
What kinds of problems would cause the worst publicity?
What kinds of problems would cause the most customer service complaints?
What kinds of tests could easily cover multiple functionalities?
Which tests will have the best high-risk-coverage to time-required ratio?

How can it be known when to stop testing?

2009-11-10T21:33:00.002-05:00

This can be difficult to determine. Most modern software applications are so complex, and run in such an interdependent environment, that complete testing can never be done. Common factors in deciding when to stop are:

Deadlines (release deadlines, testing deadlines, etc.)
Test cases completed with certain percentage passed
Test budget depleted
Coverage of code/functionality/requirements reaches a specified point
Bug rate falls below a certain level
Beta or alpha testing period ends

What if the software is so buggy it can't really be tested at all?

2009-11-10T21:32:00.002-05:00

The best bet in this situation is for the testers to go through the process of reporting whatever bugs or blocking-type problems initially show up, with the focus being on critical bugs. Since this type of problem can severely affect schedules, and indicates deeper problems in the software development process (such as insufficient unit testing or insufficient integration testing, poor design, improper build or release procedures, etc.) managers should be notified, and provided with some documentation as evidence of the problem.

What is 'Configuration Management'?

2009-11-10T21:30:00.002-05:00

Configuration management covers the processes used to control, coordinate, and track: code, requirements, documentation, problems, change requests, designs, tools/compilers/libraries/patches, changes made to them, and who makes the changes.

What should be done after a bug is found?

2009-11-10T21:28:00.001-05:00

The bug needs to be communicated and assigned to developers that can fix it. After the problem is resolved, fixes should be re-tested, and determinations made regarding requirements for regression testing to check that fixes didn't create problems elsewhere. If a problem-tracking system is in place, it should encapsulate these processes. A variety of commercial problem-tracking/management software tools are available. The following are items to consider in the tracking process:

Complete information such that developers can understand the bug, get an idea of it's severity, and reproduce it if necessary.
Bug identifier (number, ID, etc.)
Current bug status (e.g., 'Released for Retest', 'New', etc.)
The application name or identifier and version
The function, module, feature, object, screen, etc. where the bug occurred
Environment specifics, system, platform, relevant hardware specifics
Test case name/number/identifier
One-line bug description
Full bug description
Description of steps needed to reproduce the bug if not covered by a test case or if the developer doesn't have easy access to the test case/test script/test tool
Names and/or descriptions of file/data/messages/etc. used in test
File excerpts/error messages/log file excerpts/screen shots/test tool logs that would be helpful in finding the cause of the problem
Severity estimate (a 5-level range such as 1-5 or 'critical'-to-'low' is common)
Was the bug reproducible?
Tester name
Test date
Bug reporting date
Name of developer/group/organization the problem is assigned to
Description of problem cause
Description of fix
Code section/file/module/class/method that was fixed
Date of fix
Application version that contains the fix
Tester responsible for retest
Retest date
Retest results
Regression testing requirements
Tester responsible for regression tests
Regression testing results

A reporting or tracking process should enable notification of appropriate personnel at various stages. For instance, testers need to know when retesting is needed, developers need to know when bugs are found and how to get the needed information, and reporting/summary capabilities are needed for managers.

What's a 'test case'?

2009-11-10T21:26:00.002-05:00

A test case describes an input, action, or event and an expected response, to determine if a feature of a software application is working correctly. A test case may contain particulars such as test case identifier, test case name, objective, test conditions/setup, input data requirements, steps, and expected results. The level of detail may vary significantly depending on the organization and project context.

Note that the process of developing test cases can help find problems in the requirements or design of an application, since it requires completely thinking through the operation of the application. For this reason, it's useful to prepare test cases early in the development cycle if possible.

What's a 'test plan'?

2009-11-10T21:23:00.002-05:00

A software project test plan is a document that describes the objectives, scope, approach, and focus of a software testing effort. The process of preparing a test plan is a useful way to think through the efforts needed to validate the acceptability of a software product. The completed document will help people outside the test group understand the 'why' and 'how' of product validation. It should be thorough enough to be useful but not so thorough that no one outside the test group will read it. The following are some of the items that might be included in a test plan, depending on the particular project:

Title
Identification of software including version/release numbers
Revision history of document including authors, dates, approvals
Table of Contents
Purpose of document, intended audience
Objective of testing effort
Software product overview
Relevant related document list, such as requirements, design documents, other test plans, etc.
Relevant standards or legal requirements
Traceability requirements
Relevant naming conventions and identifier conventions
Overall software project organization and personnel/contact-info/responsibilties
Test organization and personnel/contact-info/responsibilities
Assumptions and dependencies
Project risk analysis
Testing priorities and focus
Scope and limitations of testing
Test outline - a decomposition of the test approach by test type, feature, functionality, process, system, module, etc. as applicable
Outline of data input equivalence classes, boundary value analysis, error classes
Test environment - hardware, operating systems, other required software, data configurations, interfaces to other systems
Test environment validity analysis - differences between the test and production systems and their impact on test validity.
Test environment setup and configuration issues
Software migration processes
Software CM processes
Test data setup requirements
Database setup requirements
Outline of system-logging/error-logging/other capabilities, and tools such as screen capture software, that will be used to help describe and report bugs
Discussion of any specialized software or hardware tools that will be used by testers to help track the cause or source of bugs
Test automation - justification and overview
Test tools to be used, including versions, patches, etc.
Test script/test code maintenance processes and version control
Problem tracking and resolution - tools and processes
Project test metrics to be used
Reporting requirements and testing deliverables
Software entrance and exit criteria
Initial sanity testing period and criteria
Test suspension and restart criteria
Personnel allocation
Personnel pre-training needs
Test site/location
Outside test organizations to be utilized and their purpose, responsibilties, deliverables, contact persons, and coordination issues
Relevant proprietary, classified, security, and licensing issues.
Open issues
Appendix - glossary, acronyms, etc.

What steps are needed to develop and run software tests?

2009-11-10T21:21:00.001-05:00

The following are some of the steps to consider:

Obtain requirements, functional design, and internal design specifications, user stories, and other available/necessary information
Obtain budget and schedule requirements
Determine project-related personnel and their responsibilities, reporting requirements, required standards and processes (such as release processes, change processes, etc.)
Determine project context, relative to the existing quality culture of the product/organization/business, and how it might impact testing scope, aproaches, and methods.
Identify application's higher-risk and mor important aspects, set priorities, and determine scope and limitations of tests.
Determine test approaches and methods - unit, integration, functional, system, security, load, usability tests, etc.
Determine test environment requirements (hardware, software, configuration, versions, communications, etc.)
Determine testware requirements (automation tools, coverage analyzers, test tracking, problem/bug tracking, etc.)
Determine test input data requirements
Identify tasks, those responsible for tasks, and labor requirements
Set schedule estimates, timelines, milestones
Determine, where apprapriate, input equivalence classes, boundary value analyses, error classes
Prepare test plan document(s) and have needed reviews/approvals
Write test cases
Have needed reviews/inspections/approvals of test cases
Prepare test environment and testware, obtain needed user manuals/reference documents/configuration guides/installation guides, set up test tracking processes, set up logging and archiving processes, set up or obtain test input data
Obtain and install software releases
Perform tests
Evaluate and report results
Track problems/bugs and fixes
Retest as needed
Maintain and update test plans, test cases, test environment, and testware through life cycle