Several months ago, a project was completed (let’s call it Project X) that must have contained the biggest impact to our software. What I mean is that the scope impacted a lot of features, and therefore to sign it off, the testers ran an insane amount of regression tests. The Project X team ended up running these tests with the help of other teams, and many hours of overtime was needed.
A release was being planned that involved more bug fixes than usual. I think one of the Test Managers had suggested that we run a full regression test to ensure the changes made by Project X hadn’t been effected. Marcus, a tester involved in Project X stated that this was an “unreasonable request, and we need to do a more focussed, targeted test”.
The next day, a Test Manager came up to Marcus and said she had asked someone to give estimates of a full regression and she had been quoted 6 weeks. She said it was absurd and wanted Marcus to confirm it. Marcus stated once more that he had already highlighted it was an unreasonable ask. He explained that she is requesting that 4 people run the tests over a two week period, when the original team had three weeks and around 20 people were involved. This is why Marcus rejected the proposal in the first place.
Another day passes, and another Test Manager announces that, after much debate – running a full regression isn’t feasible, so they will do a targeted regression.
No doubt there were one or more meetings to discuss this, when Marcus had already told them how unfeasible it was a couple of days earlier. It’s just that people with the authority to make the decisions, and the people that actually have the knowledge of how things work – are completely different people.
Stranger Coding Tings 