←back to thread

A software conference that advocates for quality

(bettersoftwareconference.com)
112 points leoncaet | 1 comments | 11 Jul 25 21:50 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
supportengineer ◴[12 Jul 25 05:29 UTC] No.44539559[source]▶
I’ve seen one company in my 30 year career with effective quality control.

The QE engineers and the development engineers were in entirely separate branches of the org chart. They had different incentive structures. The interface documentation was the source of truth.

The release cadence was slow. QE had absolute authority to stop a release. QE wrote more code than development engineers did with their tests and test automation.

replies(5): >>44539694 #>>44539859 #>>44540375 #>>44540418 #>>44541189 #
1. tsimionescu ◴[12 Jul 25 06:37 UTC] No.44539859[source]▶
The company I work for used to be organized like this a decade or so ago, and people who were around back then still tell horror stories that we all laugh about. Things like bug targets not being met leading to extreme bug ping-pong ("you didn't specify the phase of the moon when this crash on clicking Run reproduced, Needs Information", "this GUI control is misaligned, here are 5 bugs, one for each button that is not where it should be", endless hostile discussions on the severity of bugs and so on).

Sofwtare development and quality assurance should be tightly integrated and should work together on ensuring a good product. Passing builds over a wall of documentation is a recipe for disasters, not good quality software.