Permie surrealism

[OwlHoot]

I feel Mich is possibly not thinking sufficiently outside the box here.

If one or more errors prevent most of the app from working, then any test that relies on that unavailable functionality fails by default. So if the test plan involves hundreds of "blocked" test cases, all these have automatically failed ness pah?

And with that blinding flash of insight I'm off to bed. Must be on tip-top form for the client tomorrow don'cha know.

[NickFitz]

I suspect the huff was because you are unable to access the other 240+ errors yet.

Indeed. Once the small number of blocking issues are out of the way, you'll be able to expose the remaining 240 issues. Unfortunately this will be the day after he has to deliver his report.

Then he'll have to deliver a report explaining why he didn't anticipate such a large number of issues.

And round and round it goes...

[NickFitz]

Indeed. Once the small number of blocking issues are out of the way, you'll be able to expose the remaining 240 issues. Unfortunately this will be the day after he has to deliver his report.

Then he'll have to deliver a report explaining why he didn't anticipate such a large number of issues.

And round and round it goes...

If you feel like lending this chap a hand in explaining why he can't write a report about things that haven't yet happened, without getting too Wittgensteinian about it, you might want to point him to the field of motoring analogies:

How comfortable are the seats?
We don't know, the doors won't open.

How bright are the headlights?
We don't know, the battery won't charge.

How does it handle under braking?
We don't know, the engine won't start.

He might be able to convey the significance of your seven showstoppers to them that way.

[HeadOfTesting]

I feel Mich is possibly not thinking sufficiently outside the box here.

If one or more errors prevent most of the app from working, then any test that relies on that unavailable functionality fails by default. So if the test plan involves hundreds of "blocked" test cases, all these have automatically failed ness pah?

And with that blinding flash of insight I'm off to bed. Must be on tip-top form for the client tomorrow don'cha know.

alas, "failed" and "not run" are treated as distinct states in testing land

[worzelGummidge]

It sounds like you have only found seven errors because a number of those seven errors are preventing you from accessing functionality within the software that would highlight other inconsistencies between the specification and functionality that would highlight further errors, about 243 by the sound of it.

[Mich the Tester]

Seeing as I only started a couple of weeks ago, I'm taking over a test process which has been, to say the least, problematic. Here are the roots of the problem;

1 Clientco failed to specify the software on time for the developers and testers. Developers therefore started building without a spec.

2 Clientco chose plenty cheapness above quality for the testers; they tried to test everything with users, and only now have realized that you need professional testers if you're going to test complex interfaces properly.

Users wrote the test cases such that there are too many dependencies on the whole process working; a professional tester would try to avoid this and ensure that one finding doesn't block too many cases.

In other words, the usual story.