When comparing the frequency and granularity of test planning and execution in products developed under Waterfall and Agile methods, we observed that in Agile: we have more tests, in the story level and we have a progressive increment of test coverage all over the product and higher frequency running those tests.
Continue reading “Why Agile test planning makes software quality superior than in Waterfall”
(Munich, Germany) Some time ago, I wrote about the value taken with the execution of Proof of Concepts (POCs), and how important they are to give us confidence for future decisions. I would like to go back to this matter because I believe POCs are an important starting points to scale product complexity. At the same time, there is a task we can handle in order to improve product quality: User acceptance tests (UAT). So if we do it well we can increase product complexity and plan UAT in an incremental process of add/ develop new features and also other non-functional requirements.
Continue reading “Planning User Acceptance Tests in parallel with the product complexity increase”
(Berlin, Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe) – Some weeks ago, when I visited the Memorial, the feeling of loneliness and lack of direction invaded me. I think this is the main achievement of the architect (Peter Eisenman)… bring this feeling to the visitors. And from the position in the picture I asked to myself “What have we learned from this horror?”. Inspired by a continuous learning for a continuous improvement, I would like to make the question applied to bugs and change requirements (CR), but particularly in this post: what can we learn from bugs? We should take them all as improvement opportunities.