When can we ship?
Tuesday, April 4th, 2006- Risk matrix
- All automation passes
- Requirements verified
- 95% test case coverage
- Metrics
- Ask the team!
- All P1 and P2 bugs are fixed
- P1s and P2s are issues that need to be fixed before the release. P1 requires an immediate fix
- P2 is important for the release but does not prevent the testers from doing their job.
- Customer issues usually get marked as P2 or sometimes P1 depending on the criticality of the problem.
- The processs of keeping track of these issues is managed in combination by support , product management, project management, development and test engineering teams.
- If customer issue
- Product management assess the impact with input from support
- Evaluate the value having the specific issue fixed against the list of other P1 and P2 bugs.
- If it doesn’t need to be fixed move it to the next realese.
- If interal issue
- Evaluate it’s impact on the project schedule
- If high – then fix it now
- If Low – then move it to the next release
- Frequency of meetings
- IIn the beginning it was every day. This was effective in managing the list when there were only 3 or 4 people.
- As the number of contributing members grew this became difficult
- We scaled it back to twice a week
- Near the end of the project we will met more frequently to make sure nothing slips through the cracks.
- Risk matrix
- The risk matrix is a simple spreedsheet that contains each feature listed in the left column and each build number across the top. Cells get updated on a daily basis with 3 status codes – Green, Red and Grey. Green means everything is good with that feature. Red means there is a problem and includes the bug number in the cell. Grey means that there is more testing or investigation to be done before a reliable status can be done.
- With the risk matrix the question then becomes can we live with the risk that feature X, Y and Z havne’t been thoroughly tested.
- Is it worth slipping the schedule to have these features "fully" tested?
- We provide this document to the project stakeholders at varying frequencies during the project life cycle. The information is always available but we don’t want information overload. Near the beginning of the project the interested in our ability to ship the software is generally low so we don’t send the document out. The week or two before release is a different story. There is a very high interest in this information in the last stages of the product so we provide the document on a daily basis.
- Doing this achives buy-in at all levels of project involvement.
- This helps us stay away from becoming the "Quality gatekeepers".
- All automation passes
- Nightly automation passes
- We use our own product to test our product.
- Requirements verified
- Walk through the requirements and make sure we have test case coverage for each item
- Test cases aren’t very detailed. (More on this later.
- 95% test case coverage
- This is useless metric even when used in context of the other heursitics.
- but, It makes those who don’t understand what we do feel really good
- Metrics
- Bug rates
- Double cross over graph
- High severity issues outstanding
- Ask the team!
- Ask the team "Can we ship?"
- Very good way to figure out if you are done testing.
- You will be able to tell if they are comfortable with their own work.
Why are we this way.
- We are market driven and IP intensive
- Our goal is to be first to market with new products and maintain market leadership with current products.
- We deal with any missed bugs/features afterwards.
- We need to respond quickly to customer concerns
- Lightweight approach to test documentation because product changes are very dynamic.
- We don’t document every step required to run a test case because tomorrow – some of those steps won’t be around
- We lean towards writing test cases that get the point across but not at the expense of going into detail.
- All signs can point to go but we overlook something.
- We’ve done enough releases to feel comfortable that this list will cover all items to a suffecient depth
- It’s a trade off between breadth vs depth
- Confidence with this heuristic is still touchy when we release new products