Stephen wrote:
> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Well, let's put it this way: The plan is 17 pages long, and I haven't
>> even said what the tests are yet! o_O
>>
>> Basically there's a standard template for writing test plans. It's
>> designed for huge complex systems, and the thing I'm testing is tiny. So
>> I've already spend ages deleting all the stuff that's not applicable.
>> And it's *still* 17 pages of whaffle.
>>
>> (This is who we are, this is what the software is, this is were it's
>> going to be used, this is who is going to use it, this is who will test
>> it, this is what the software is for, this is what we do currently, this
>> is why software testing is necessary, this is what the tests attempt to
>> demonstrate, this is all the things the testing won't cover, this is
>> what we'll do if any tests fail, this is what we'll do if we ever alter
>> the software, this is the list of documents that will be produced during
>> the test process, etc.)
>>
>> Believe it or not, that bundle I just wrote there? It's incomplete. (!)
> 
> Right! As if anyone ever reads that.

Trust me, QA does. :-S (And usually they manage to find some minor typo 
somewhere so they can reject the entire document and make me resubmit it 
all over again. Or perhaps just complain I used the wrong size 
paperclips...)

> I know the sort of template you mean.
> Here we have to write design documents about what we are going to do before we
> do it and get it authorised by QA. But if there is even a minor change then the
> doc has to be re-evaluated and all work on it stops until it goes to the next
> status.

Fun, isn't it?

Oh, did I mention? The actual *testing* needs to happen before 1 Dec 
2007. No pressure or anything. I've never actually written a full test 
document for software before, but now's a fine time to learn. :-S

> Hint, put in a deliberate mistake that you can take out to keep QA happy :)

Yeah. I am *so* not trying that...

Post a reply to this message