Please turn JavaScript on
Association for Software Testing icon

Association for Software Testing

Is this your feed? Claim it!

Publisher:  Unclaimed!
Message frequency:  0.62 / day

Message History

TESTING’S COMFORTABLE LIES | PART 3

There is a pattern running through this series that is worth naming before we get into the third lie, because the third one only makes sense when you see it as part of a sequence.

Lie 1 said quality belongs to everyone. The result was that accountability dissolved into a collective sentiment that felt in...


Read full story
Pull requests are quality control

Engineering teams often treat pull requests (a popular mechanism for peer review) as a quality-control mechanism. It's where senior judgment gets applied to code before it reaches production; where context gets checked, trade-offs get surfaced, risk gets noticed, and weaker work gets caught before it escapes.

When the pull requ...


Read full story

Just a quick update to let those of you who bookmarked this blog or who have subscribed to my RSS feed know that I have (re-)started a newsletter.

Why a newsletter?

As you might know (or not), while I’ve been pretty active on


Read full story

When I built the handbook chatbot, my hypothesis was that it would drive book sales. Along with the chatbot, I built tests to make sure it worked.

Technical accuracy wasn't enough. The hypothesis failed. Book sales stayed flat. But I learned something. Users weren't asking the book factual questions. They were asking things like: "a change I pushed for has ...


Read full story

TESTING’S COMFORTABLE LIES | PART 2

After Part 1 of this series went out, a few people made a point worth addressing. The accountability conversation felt dated. “Quality is everyone’s responsibility” is a phrase from another era. The industry has moved on. Why are we still arguing about it?

It is a fair challenge, and I want to answe...


Read full story