What makes a good test engineer?

A good test engineer has a ‘test to break’ attitude, an ability to take the point of view of
the customer, a strong desire for quality, and an attention to detail. Tact and diplomacy
are useful in maintaining a cooperative relationship with developers, and an ability to
communicate with both technical (developers) and non-technical (customers,
management) people is useful. Previous software development experience can be helpful
as it provides a deeper understanding of the software development process, gives the
tester an appreciation for the developers’ point of view, and reduce the learning curve in
automated test tool programming. Judgement skills are needed to assess high-risk areas
of an application on which to focus testing efforts when time is limited.

What makes a good Software QA engineer?

The same qualities a good tester has are useful for a QA engineer. Additionally, they
must be able to understand the entire software development process and how it can fit
into the business approach and goals of the organization. Communication skills and the
ability to understand various sides of issues are important. In organizations in the early
stages of implementing QA processes, patience and diplomacy are especially needed. An
ability to find problems as well as to see ‘what’s missing’ is important for inspections and
reviews.

What makes a good QA or Test manager?

A good QA, test, or QA/Test(combined) manager should:
• be familiar with the software development process
• be able to maintain enthusiasm of their team and promote a positive atmosphere, despite
• what is a somewhat ‘negative’ process (e.g., looking for or preventing problems)
• be able to promote teamwork to increase productivity
• be able to promote cooperation between software, test, and QA engineers
• have the diplomatic skills needed to promote improvements in QA processes
• have the ability to withstand pressures and say ‘no’ to other managers when quality is
insufficient or QA processes are not being adhered to
• have people judgement skills for hiring and keeping skilled personnel
• be able to communicate with technical and non-technical people, engineers, managers,
and customers.
• be able to run meetings and keep them focused

What’s the role of documentation in QA?

Critical. (Note that documentation can be electronic, not necessarily paper.) QA practices
should be documented such that they are repeatable. Specifications, designs, business
rules, inspection reports, configurations, code changes, test plans, test cases, bug reports,
user manuals, etc. should all be documented. There should ideally be a system for easily
finding and obtaining documents and determining what documentation will have a
particular piece of information. Change management for documentation should be used if
possible.
What’s the big deal about ‘requirements’?
One of the most reliable methods of insuring problems, or failure, in a complex software
project is to have poorly documented requirements specifications. Requirements are the
details describing an application’s externally-perceived functionality and properties.
Requirements should be clear, complete, reasonably detailed, cohesive, attainable, and
testable. A non-testable requirement would be, for example, ‘user-friendly’ (too
subjective). A testable requirement would be something like ‘the user must enter their
previously-assigned password to access the application’. Determining and organizing
requirements details in a useful and efficient way can be a difficult effort; different
methods are available depending on the particular project. Many books are available that
describe various approaches to this task. (See the Bookstore section’s ‘Software
Requirements Engineering’ category for books on Software Requirements.)
Care should be taken to involve ALL of a project’s significant ‘customers’ in the
requirements process. ‘Customers’ could be in-house personnel or out, and could include
end-users, customer acceptance testers, customer contract officers, customer
management, future software maintenance engineers, salespeople, etc. Anyone who could
later derail the project if their expectations aren’t met should be included if possible.
Organizations vary considerably in their handling of requirements specifications. Ideally,
the requirements are spelled out in a document with statements such as ‘The product
shall…..’. ‘Design’ specifications should not be confused with ‘requirements’; design
specifications should be traceable back to the requirements.
In some organizations requirements may end up in high level project plans, functional
specification documents, in design documents, or in other documents at various levels of
detail. No matter what they are called, some type of documentation with detailed
requirements will be needed by testers in order to properly plan and execute tests.
Without such documentation, there will be no clear-cut way to determine if a software
application is performing correctly.
‘Agile’ methods such as XP use methods requiring close interaction and cooperation
between programmers and customers/end-users to iteratively develop requirements. The
programmer uses ‘Test first’ development to first create automated unit testing code,
which essentially embodies the requirements.

What steps are needed to develop and run software tests?

The following are some of the steps to consider:
• Obtain requirements, functional design, and internal design specifications and other
necessary documents
• Obtain budget and schedule requirements
• Determine project-related personnel and their responsibilities, reporting requirements,
required standards and processes (such as release processes, change processes, etc.)
• Identify application’s higher-risk aspects, set priorities, and determine scope and
limitations of tests
• Determine test approaches and methods - unit, integration, functional, system, load,
usability tests, etc.
• Determine test environment requirements (hardware, software, communications, etc.)
• Determine testware requirements (record/playback tools, coverage analyzers, test
tracking, problem/bug tracking, etc.)
• Determine test input data requirements
• Identify tasks, those responsible for tasks, and labor requirements
• Set schedule estimates, timelines, milestones
• Determine input equivalence classes, boundary value analyses, error classes
• Prepare test plan document and have needed reviews/approvals
• Write test cases
• Have needed reviews/inspections/approvals of test cases
• Prepare test environment and testware, obtain needed user manuals/reference
documents/configuration guides/installation guides, set up test tracking processes, set up
logging and archiving processes, set up or obtain test input data
• Obtain and install software releases
• Perform tests
• Evaluate and report results
• Track problems/bugs and fixes
• Retest as needed
• Maintain and update test plans, test cases, test environment, and testware through life
cycle

What’s a ‘test plan’?

A software project test plan is a document that describes the objectives, scope, approach,
and focus of a software testing effort. The process of preparing a test plan is a useful way
to think through the efforts needed to validate the acceptability of a software product. The
completed document will help people outside the test group understand the ‘why’ and
‘how’ of product validation. It should be thorough enough to be useful but not so
thorough that no one outside the test group will read it. The following are some of the
items that might be included in a test plan, depending on the particular project:
• Title
• Identification of software including version/release numbers
• Revision history of document including authors, dates, approvals
• Table of Contents
• Purpose of document, intended audience
• Objective of testing effort
• Software product overview
• Relevant related document list, such as requirements, design documents, other test
plans, etc.
• Relevant standards or legal requirements
• Traceability requirements
• Relevant naming conventions and identifier conventions
• Overall software project organization and personnel/contact-info/responsibilties
• Test organization and personnel/contact-info/responsibilities
• Assumptions and dependencies
• Project risk analysis
• Testing priorities and focus
• Scope and limitations of testing
• Test outline - a decomposition of the test approach by test type, feature, functionality,
process, system, module, etc. as applicable
• Outline of data input equivalence classes, boundary value analysis, error classes
• Test environment - hardware, operating systems, other required software, data
configurations, interfaces to other systems
• Test environment validity analysis - differences between the test and production
systems and their impact on test validity.
• Test environment setup and configuration issues
• Software migration processes
• Software CM processes
• Test data setup requirements
• Database setup requirements
• Outline of system-logging/error-logging/other capabilities, and tools such as screen
capture software, that will be used to help describe and report bugs
• Discussion of any specialized software or hardware tools that will be used by testers to
help track the cause or source of bugs
• Test automation - justification and overview
• Test tools to be used, including versions, patches, etc.
• Test script/test code maintenance processes and version control
• Problem tracking and resolution - tools and processes
• Project test metrics to be used
• Reporting requirements and testing deliverables
• Software entrance and exit criteria
• Initial sanity testing period and criteria
• Test suspension and restart criteria
• Personnel allocation
• Personnel pre-training needs
• Test site/location
• Outside test organizations to be utilized and their purpose, responsibilties, deliverables,
contact persons, and coordination issues
• Relevant proprietary, classified, security, and licensing issues.
• Open issues
• Appendix - glossary, acronyms, etc.
(See the Bookstore section’s ‘Software Testing’ and ‘Software QA’ categories for useful
books with more information.)

What’s a ‘test case’?

• A test case is a document that describes an input, action, or event and an expected
response, to determine if a feature of an application is working correctly. A test case
should contain particulars such as test case identifier, test case name, objective, test
conditions/setup, input data requirements, steps, and expected results.
• Note that the process of developing test cases can help find problems in the
requirements or design of an application, since it requires completely thinking through
the operation of the application. For this reason, it’s useful to prepare test cases early in
the development cycle if possible.

What should be done after a bug is found?

The bug needs to be communicated and assigned to developers that can fix it. After the
problem is resolved, fixes should be re-tested, and determinations made regarding
requirements for regression testing to check that fixes didn’t create problems elsewhere.
If a problem-tracking system is in place, it should encapsulate these processes. A variety
of commercial problem-tracking/management software tools are available (see the
‘Tools’ section for web resources with listings of such tools). The following are items to
consider in the tracking process:
• Complete information such that developers can understand the bug, get an idea of it’s
severity, and reproduce it if necessary.
• Bug identifier (number, ID, etc.)
• Current bug status (e.g., ‘Released for Retest’, ‘New’, etc.)
• The application name or identifier and version
• The function, module, feature, object, screen, etc. where the bug occurred
• Environment specifics, system, platform, relevant hardware specifics
• Test case name/number/identifier
• One-line bug description
• Full bug description
• Description of steps needed to reproduce the bug if not covered by a test case or if the
developer doesn’t have easy access to the test case/test script/test tool
• Names and/or descriptions of file/data/messages/etc. used in test
• File excerpts/error messages/log file excerpts/screen shots/test tool logs that would be
helpful in finding the cause of the problem
• Severity estimate (a 5-level range such as 1-5 or ‘critical’-to-’low’ is common)
• Was the bug reproducible?
• Tester name
• Test date
• Bug reporting date
• Name of developer/group/organization the problem is assigned to
• Description of problem cause
• Description of fix
• Code section/file/module/class/method that was fixed
• Date of fix
• Application version that contains the fix
• Tester responsible for retest
• Retest date
• Retest results
• Regression testing requirements
• Tester responsible for regression tests
• Regression testing results
A reporting or tracking process should enable notification of appropriate personnel at
various stages. For instance, testers need to know when retesting is needed, developers
need to know when bugs are found and how to get the needed information, and
reporting/summary capabilities are needed for managers.

What is ‘configuration management’?

Configuration management covers the processes used to control, coordinate, and track:
code, requirements, documentation, problems, change requests, designs,
tools/compilers/libraries/patches, changes made to them, and who makes the changes.
(See the ‘Tools’ section for web resources with listings of configuration management
tools. Also see the Bookstore section’s ‘Configuration Management’ category for useful
books with more information.)

What if the software is so buggy it can’t really be tested at all?

The best bet in this situation is for the testers to go through the process of reporting
whatever bugs or blocking-type problems initially show up, with the focus being on
critical bugs. Since this type of problem can severely affect schedules, and indicates
deeper problems in the software development process (such as insufficient unit testing or
insufficient integration testing, poor design, improper build or release procedures, etc.)
managers should be notified, and provided with some documentation as evidence of the
problem.

How can it be known when to stop testing?

This can be difficult to determine. Many modern software applications are so complex,
and run in such an interdependent environment, that complete testing can never be done.
Common factors in deciding when to stop are:
• Deadlines (release deadlines, testing deadlines, etc.)
• Test cases completed with certain percentage passed
• Test budget depleted
• Coverage of code/functionality/requirements reaches a specified point
• Bug rate falls below a certain level
• Beta or alpha testing period ends

What if there isn’t enough time for thorough testing?

Use risk analysis to determine where testing should be focused.
Since it’s rarely possible to test every possible aspect of an application, every possible
combination of events, every dependency, or everything that could go wrong, risk
analysis is appropriate to most software development projects. This requires judgement
skills, common sense, and experience. (If warranted, formal methods are also available.)
Considerations can include:
• Which functionality is most important to the project’s intended purpose?
• Which functionality is most visible to the user?
• Which functionality has the largest safety impact?
• Which functionality has the largest financial impact on users?
• Which aspects of the application are most important to the customer?
• Which aspects of the application can be tested early in the development cycle?
• Which parts of the code are most complex, and thus most subject to errors?
• Which parts of the application were developed in rush or panic mode?
• Which aspects of similar/related previous projects caused problems?
• Which aspects of similar/related previous projects had large maintenance expenses?
• Which parts of the requirements and design are unclear or poorly thought out?
• What do the developers think are the highest-risk aspects of the application?
• What kinds of problems would cause the worst publicity?
• What kinds of problems would cause the most customer service complaints?
• What kinds of tests could easily cover multiple functionalities?
• Which tests will have the best high-risk-coverage to time-required ratio?

What if the project isn’t big enough to justify extensive testing?

Consider the impact of project errors, not the size of the project. However, if extensive
testing is still not justified, risk analysis is again needed and the same considerations as
described previously in ‘What if there isn’t enough time for thorough testing?’ apply. The
tester might then do ad hoc testing, or write up a limited test plan based on the risk
analysis.

What can be done if requirements are changing continuously?

A common problem and a major headache.
• Work with the project’s stakeholders early on to understand how requirements might
change so that alternate test plans and strategies can be worked out in advance, if
possible.
• It’s helpful if the application’s initial design allows for some adaptability so that later
changes do not require redoing the application from scratch.
• If the code is well-commented and well-documented this makes changes easier for the
developers.
• Use rapid prototyping whenever possible to help customers feel sure of their
requirements and minimize changes.
• The project’s initial schedule should allow for some extra time commensurate with the
possibility of changes.
• Try to move new requirements to a ‘Phase 2′ version of an application, while using the
original requirements for the ‘Phase 1′ version.
• Negotiate to allow only easily-implemented new requirements into the project, while
moving more difficult new requirements into future versions of the application.
• Be sure that customers and management understand the scheduling impacts, inherent
risks, and costs of significant requirements changes. Then let management or the
customers (not the developers or testers) decide if the changes are warranted - after all,
that’s their job.
• Balance the effort put into setting up automated testing with the expected effort required
to re-do them to deal with changes.
• Try to design some flexibility into automated test scripts.
• Focus initial automated testing on application aspects that are most likely to remain
unchanged.
• Devote appropriate effort to risk analysis of changes to minimize regression testing
needs.
• Design some flexibility into test cases (this is not easily done; the best bet might be to
minimize the detail in the test cases, or set up only higher-level generic-type test plans)
• Focus less on detailed test plans and test cases and more on ad hoc testing (with an
understanding of the added risk that this entails).

What if the application has functionality that wasn’t in the requirements?

It may take serious effort to determine if an application has significant unexpected or
hidden functionality, and it would indicate deeper problems in the software development
process. If the functionality isn’t necessary to the purpose of the application, it should be
removed, as it may have unknown impacts or dependencies that were not taken into
account by the designer or the customer. If not removed, design information will be
needed to determine added testing needs or regression testing needs. Management should
be made aware of any significant added risks as a result of the unexpected functionality.
If the functionality only effects areas such as minor improvements in the user interface,
for example, it may not be a significant risk.

How can Software QA processes be implemented without stifling productivity?

By implementing QA processes slowly over time, using consensus to reach agreement on
processes, and adjusting and experimenting as an organization grows and matures,
productivity will be improved instead of stifled. Problem prevention will lessen the need
for problem detection, panics and burn-out will decrease, and there will be improved
focus and less wasted effort. At the same time, attempts should be made to keep
processes simple and efficient, minimize paperwork, promote computer-based processes
and automated tracking and reporting, minimize time required in meetings, and promote
training as part of the QA process. However, no one - especially talented technical types -
likes rules or bureacracy, and in the short run things may slow down a bit. A typical
scenario would be that more days of planning and development will be needed, but less
time will be required for late-night bug-fixing and calming of irate customers.

What if an organization is growing so fast that fixed QA processes are impossible?

This is a common problem in the software industry, especially in new technology areas.
There is no easy solution in this situation, other than:
• Hire good people
• Management should ‘ruthlessly prioritize’ quality issues and maintain focus on the
customer
• Everyone in the organization should be clear on what ‘quality’ means to the customer

How does a client/server environment affect testing?

Client/server applications can be quite complex due to the multiple dependencies among
clients, data communications, hardware, and servers. Thus testing requirements can be
extensive. When time is limited (as it usually is) the focus should be on integration and
system testing. Additionally, load/stress/performance testing may be useful in
determining client/server application limitations and capabilities. There are commercial
tools to assist with such testing. (See the ‘Tools’ section for web resources with listings
that include these kinds of test tools.)

How can World Wide Web sites be tested?

Web sites are essentially client/server applications - with web servers and ‘browser’
clients. Consideration should be given to the interactions between html pages, TCP/IP
communications, Internet connections, firewalls, applications that run in web pages (such
as applets, javascript, plug-in applications), and applications that run on the server side
(such as cgi scripts, database interfaces, logging applications, dynamic page generators,
asp, etc.). Additionally, there are a wide variety of servers and browsers, various versions
of each, small but sometimes significant differences between them, variations in
connection speeds, rapidly changing technologies, and multiple standards and protocols.
The end result is that testing for web sites can become a major ongoing effort. Other
considerations might include:
• What are the expected loads on the server (e.g., number of hits per unit time?), and what
kind of performance is required under such loads (such as web server response time,
database query response times). What kinds of tools will be needed for performance
testing (such as web load testing tools, other tools already in house that can be adapted,
web robot downloading tools, etc.)?
• Who is the target audience? What kind of browsers will they be using? What kind of
connection speeds will they by using? Are they intra- organization (thus with likely high
connection speeds and similar browsers) or Internet-wide (thus with a wide variety of
connection speeds and browser types)?
• What kind of performance is expected on the client side (e.g., how fast should pages
appear, how fast should animations, applets, etc. load and run)?
• Will down time for server and content maintenance/upgrades be allowed? how much?
• What kinds of security (firewalls, encryptions, passwords, etc.) will be required and
what is it expected to do? How can it be tested?
• How reliable are the site’s Internet connections required to be? And how does that
affect backup system or redundant connection requirements and testing?
• What processes will be required to manage updates to the web site’s content, and what
are the requirements for maintaining, tracking, and controlling page content, graphics,
links, etc.?
• Which HTML specification will be adhered to? How strictly? What variations will be
allowed for targeted browsers?
• Will there be any standards or requirements for page appearance and/or graphics
throughout a site or parts of a site??
• How will internal and external links be validated and updated? how often?
• Can testing be done on the production system, or will a separate test system be
required? How are browser caching, variations in browser option settings, dial-up
connection variabilities, and real-world internet ‘traffic congestion’ problems to be
accounted for in testing?
• How extensive or customized are the server logging and reporting requirements; are
they considered an integral part of the system and do they require testing?
• How are cgi programs, applets, javascripts, ActiveX components, etc. to be maintained,
tracked, controlled, and tested?
Some sources of site security information include the Usenet newsgroup
‘comp.security.announce’ and links concerning web site security in the ‘Other Resources’
section.
Some usability guidelines to consider - these are subjective and may or may not apply to
a given situation (Note: more information on usability testing issues can be found in
articles about web site usability in the ‘Other Resources’ section):
• Pages should be 3-5 screens max unless content is tightly focused on a single topic. If
larger, provide internal links within the page.
• The page layouts and design elements should be consistent throughout a site, so that it’s
clear to the user that they’re still within a site.
• Pages should be as browser-independent as possible, or pages should be provided or
generated based on the browser-type.
• All pages should have links external to the page; there should be no dead-end pages.
• The page owner, revision date, and a link to a contact person or organization should be
included on each page.
Many new web site test tools have appeared in the recent years and more than 280 of
them are listed in the ‘Web Test Tools’ section.

How is testing affected by object-oriented designs?

Well-engineered object-oriented design can make it easier to trace from code to internal
design to functional design to requirements. While there will be little affect on black box
testing (where an understanding of the internal design of the application is unnecessary),
white-box testing can be oriented to the application’s objects. If the application was well-
designed this can simplify test design.

What is Extreme Programming and what’s it got to do with testing?

Extreme Programming (XP) is a software development approach for small teams on risk-
prone projects with unstable requirements. It was created by Kent Beck who described
the approach in his book ‘Extreme Programming Explained’ (See the Softwareqatest.com
Books page.). Testing (’extreme testing’) is a core aspect of Extreme Programming.
Programmers are expected to write unit and functional test code first - before the
application is developed. Test code is under source control along with the rest of the
code. Customers are expected to be an integral part of the project team and to help
develope scenarios for acceptance/black box testing. Acceptance tests are preferably
automated, and are modified and rerun for each of the frequent development iterations.
QA and test personnel are also required to be an integral part of the project team.
Detailed requirements documentation is not used, and frequent re-scheduling, re-
estimating, and re-prioritizing is expected. For more info see the XP-related listings in the
Softwareqatest.com ‘Other Resources’ section.

What is ‘Software Quality Assurance’?

Software QA involves the entire software development PROCESS - monitoring and
improving the process, making sure that any agreed-upon standards and procedures are
followed, and ensuring that problems are found and dealt with. It is oriented to
‘prevention’. (See the Bookstore section’s ‘Software QA’ category for a list of useful
books on Software Quality Assurance.)

What is ‘Software Testing’?

Testing involves operation of a system or application under controlled conditions and
evaluating the results (eg, ‘if the user is in interface A of the application while using
hardware B, and does C, then D should happen’). The controlled conditions should
include both normal and abnormal conditions. Testing should intentionally attempt to
make things go wrong to determine if things happen when they shouldn’t or things don’t
happen when they should. It is oriented to ‘detection’. (See the Bookstore section’s
‘Software Testing’ category for a list of useful books on Software Testing.)
• Organizations vary considerably in how they assign responsibility for QA and testing.
Sometimes they’re the combined responsibility of one group or individual. Also common
are project teams that include a mix of testers and developers who work closely together,
with overall QA processes monitored by project managers. It will depend on what best
fits an organization’s size and business structure.

What are some recent major computer system failures caused by software bugs?
• A major U.S. retailer was reportedly hit with a large government fine in October of
2003 due to web site errors that enabled customers to view one anothers’ online orders.
• News stories in the fall of 2003 stated that a manufacturing company recalled all their
transportation products in order to fix a software problem causing instability in certain
circumstances. The company found and reported the bug itself and initiated the recall
procedure in which a software upgrade fixed the problems.
• In August of 2003 a U.S. court ruled that a lawsuit against a large online brokerage
company could proceed; the lawsuit reportedly involved claims that the company was not
fixing system problems that sometimes resulted in failed stock trades, based on the
experiences of 4 plaintiffs during an 8-month period. A previous lower court’s ruling that
“…six miscues out of more than 400 trades does not indicate negligence.” was
invalidated.
• In April of 2003 it was announced that the largest student loan company in the U.S.
made a software error in calculating the monthly payments on 800,000 loans. Although
borrowers were to be notified of an increase in their required payments, the company will
still reportedly lose $8 million in interest. The error was uncovered when borrowers
began reporting inconsistencies in their bills.
• News reports in February of 2003 revealed that the U.S. Treasury Department mailed
50,000 Social Security checks without any beneficiary names. A spokesperson indicated
that the missing names were due to an error in a software change. Replacement checks
were subsequently mailed out with the problem corrected, and recipients were then able
to cash their Social Security checks.
• In March of 2002 it was reported that software bugs in Britain’s national tax system
resulted in more than 100,000 erroneous tax overcharges. The problem was partly
attibuted to the difficulty of testing the integration of multiple systems.
• A newspaper columnist reported in July 2001 that a serious flaw was found in off-the-
shelf software that had long been used in systems for tracking certain U.S. nuclear
materials. The same software had been recently donated to another country to be used in
tracking their own nuclear materials, and it was not until scientists in that country
discovered the problem, and shared the information, that U.S. officials became aware of
the problems.
• According to newspaper stories in mid-2001, a major systems development contractor
was fired and sued over problems with a large retirement plan management system.
According to the reports, the client claimed that system deliveries were late, the software
had excessive defects, and it caused other systems to crash.
• In January of 2001 newspapers reported that a major European railroad was hit by the
aftereffects of the Y2K bug. The company found that many of their newer trains would
not run due to their inability to recognize the date ‘31/12/2000′; the trains were started by
altering the control system’s date settings.
• News reports in September of 2000 told of a software vendor settling a lawsuit with a
large mortgage lender; the vendor had reportedly delivered an online mortgage
processing system that did not meet specifications, was delivered late, and didn’t work.
• In early 2000, major problems were reported with a new computer system in a large
suburban U.S. public school district with 100,000+ students; problems included 10,000
erroneous report cards and students left stranded by failed class registration systems; the
district’s CIO was fired. The school district decided to reinstate it’s original 25-year old
system for at least a year until the bugs were worked out of the new system by the
software vendors.
• In October of 1999 the $125 million NASA Mars Climate Orbiter spacecraft was
believed to be lost in space due to a simple data conversion error. It was determined that
spacecraft software used certain data in English units that should have been in metric
units. Among other tasks, the orbiter was to serve as a communications relay for the Mars
Polar Lander mission, which failed for unknown reasons in December 1999. Several
investigating panels were convened to determine the process failures that allowed the
error to go undetected.
• Bugs in software supporting a large commercial high-speed data network affected
70,000 business customers over a period of 8 days in August of 1999. Among those
affected was the electronic trading system of the largest U.S. futures exchange, which
was shut down for most of a week as a result of the outages.
• In April of 1999 a software bug caused the failure of a $1.2 billion U.S. military
satellite launch, the costliest unmanned accident in the history of Cape Canaveral
launches. The failure was the latest in a string of launch failures, triggering a complete
military and industry review of U.S. space launch programs, including software
integration and testing processes. Congressional oversight hearings were requested.
• A small town in Illinois in the U.S. received an unusually large monthly electric bill of
$7 million in March of 1999. This was about 700 times larger than its normal bill. It
turned out to be due to bugs in new software that had been purchased by the local power
company to deal with Y2K software issues.
• In early 1999 a major computer game company recalled all copies of a popular new
product due to software problems. The company made a public apology for releasing a
product before it was ready.

Why is it often hard for management to get serious about quality assurance?
Solving problems is a high-visibility process; preventing problems is low-visibility. This
is illustrated by an old parable:
In ancient China there was a family of healers, one of whom was known throughout the
land and employed as a physician to a great lord. The physician was asked which of his
family was the most skillful healer. He replied,
“I tend to the sick and dying with drastic and dramatic treatments, and on occasion
someone is cured and my name gets out among the lords.”
“My elder brother cures sickness when it just begins to take root, and his skills are known
among the local peasants and neighbors.”
“My eldest brother is able to sense the spirit of sickness and eradicate it before it takes
form. His name is unknown outside our home.”

Why does software have bugs?

• miscommunication or no communication - as to specifics of what an application should
or shouldn’t do (the application’s requirements).
• software complexity - the complexity of current software applications can be difficult to
comprehend for anyone without experience in modern-day software development.
Windows-type interfaces, client-server and distributed applications, data
communications, enormous relational databases, and sheer size of applications have all
contributed to the exponential growth in software/system complexity. And the use of
object-oriented techniques can complicate instead of simplify a project unless it is well-
engineered.
• programming errors - programmers, like anyone else, can make mistakes.
• changing requirements (whether documented or undocumented) - the customer may not
understand the effects of changes, or may understand and request them anyway -
redesign, rescheduling of engineers, effects on other projects, work already completed
that may have to be redone or thrown out, hardware requirements that may be affected,
etc. If there are many minor changes or any major changes, known and unknown
dependencies among parts of the project are likely to interact and cause problems, and the
complexity of coordinating changes may result in errors. Enthusiasm of engineering staff
may be affected. In some fast-changing business environments, continuously modified
requirements may be a fact of life. In this case, management must understand the
resulting risks, and QA and test engineers must adapt and plan for continuous extensive
testing to keep the inevitable bugs from running out of control - see ‘What can be done if
requirements are changing continuously?’ in Part 2 of the FAQ.
• time pressures - scheduling of software projects is difficult at best, often requiring a lot
of guesswork. When deadlines loom and the crunch comes, mistakes will be made.
• egos - people prefer to say things like:
‘no problem’
‘piece of cake’
‘I can whip that out in a few hours’
‘it should be easy to update that old code’
instead of:
‘that adds a lot of complexity and we could end up
making a lot of mistakes’
‘we have no idea if we can do that; we’ll wing it’
‘I can’t estimate how long it will take, until I
take a close look at it’
‘we can’t figure out what that old spaghetti code
did in the first place’

If there are too many unrealistic ‘no problem’s’, the result is bugs.

• poorly documented code - it’s tough to maintain and modify code that is badly written
or poorly documented; the result is bugs. In many organizations management provides no
incentive for programmers to document their code or write clear, understandable,
maintainable code. In fact, it’s usually the opposite: they get points mostly for quickly
turning out code, and there’s job security if nobody else can understand it (’if it was hard
to write, it should be hard to read’).
• software development tools - visual tools, class libraries, compilers, scripting tools, etc.
often introduce their own bugs or are poorly documented, resulting in added bugs.

How can new Software QA processes be introduced in an existing organization?

• A lot depends on the size of the organization and the risks involved. For large
organizations with high-risk (in terms of lives or property) projects, serious management
buy-in is required and a formalized QA process is necessary.
• Where the risk is lower, management and organizational buy-in and QA implementation
may be a slower, step-at-a-time process. QA processes should be balanced with
productivity so as to keep bureaucracy from getting out of hand.
• For small groups or projects, a more ad-hoc process may be appropriate, depending on
the type of customers and projects. A lot will depend on team leads or managers,
feedback to developers, and ensuring adequate communications among customers,
managers, developers, and testers.
• The most value for effort will be in (a) requirements management processes, with a goal
of clear, complete, testable requirement specifications embodied in requirements or
design documentation and (b) design inspections and code inspections.

What is verification? validation?

Verification typically involves reviews and meetings to evaluate documents, plans, code,
requirements, and specifications. This can be done with checklists, issues lists,
walkthroughs, and inspection meetings. Validation typically involves actual testing and
takes place after verifications are completed. The term ‘IV & V’ refers to Independent
Verification and Validation.

What is a ‘walkthrough’?
A ‘walkthrough’ is an informal meeting for evaluation or informational purposes. Little
or no preparation is usually required.

What’s an ‘inspection’?
An inspection is more formalized than a ‘walkthrough’, typically with 3-8 people
including a moderator, reader, and a recorder to take notes. The subject of the inspection
is typically a document such as a requirements spec or a test plan, and the purpose is to
find problems and see what’s missing, not to fix anything. Attendees should prepare for
this type of meeting by reading thru the document; most problems will be found during
this preparation. The result of the inspection meeting should be a written report.
Thorough preparation for inspections is difficult, painstaking work, but is one of the most
cost effective methods of ensuring quality. Employees who are most skilled at
inspections are like the ‘eldest brother’ in the parable in ‘Why is it often hard for
management to get serious about quality assurance?’. Their skill may have low visibility
but they are extremely valuable to any software development organization, since bug
prevention is far more cost-effective than bug detection.

What kinds of testing should be considered?

• Black box testing - not based on any knowledge of internal design or code. Tests are
based on requirements and functionality.
• White box testing - based on knowledge of the internal logic of an application’s code.
Tests are based on coverage of code statements, branches, paths, conditions.
• unit testing - the most ‘micro’ scale of testing; to test particular functions or code
modules. Typically done by the programmer and not by testers, as it requires detailed
knowledge of the internal program design and code. Not always easily done unless the
application has a well-designed architecture with tight code; may require developing test
driver modules or test harnesses.
• incremental integration testing - continuous testing of an application as new
functionality is added; requires that various aspects of an application’s functionality be
independent enough to work separately before all parts of the program are completed, or
that test drivers be developed as needed; done by programmers or by testers.
• integration testing - testing of combined parts of an application to determine if they
function together correctly. The ‘parts’ can be code modules, individual applications,
client and server applications on a network, etc. This type of testing is especially relevant
to client/server and distributed systems.
• functional testing - black-box type testing geared to functional requirements of an
application; this type of testing should be done by testers. This doesn’t mean that the
programmers shouldn’t check that their code works before releasing it (which of course
applies to any stage of testing.)
• system testing - black-box type testing that is based on overall requirements
specifications; covers all combined parts of a system.
• end-to-end testing - similar to system testing; the ‘macro’ end of the test scale; involves
testing of a complete application environment in a situation that mimics real-world use,
such as interacting with a database, using network communications, or interacting with
other hardware, applications, or systems if appropriate.
• sanity testing or smoke testing - typically an initial testing effort to determine if a new
software version is performing well enough to accept it for a major testing effort. For
example, if the new software is crashing systems every 5 minutes, bogging down systems
to a crawl, or corrupting databases, the software may not be in a ’sane’ enough condition
to warrant further testing in its current state.
• regression testing - re-testing after fixes or modifications of the software or its
environment. It can be difficult to determine how much re-testing is needed, especially
near the end of the development cycle. Automated testing tools can be especially useful
for this type of testing.
• acceptance testing - final testing based on specifications of the end-user or customer, or
based on use by end-users/customers over some limited period of time.
• load testing - testing an application under heavy loads, such as testing of a web site
under a range of loads to determine at what point the system’s response time degrades or
fails.
• stress testing - term often used interchangeably with ‘load’ and ‘performance’ testing.
Also used to describe such tests as system functional testing while under unusually heavy
loads, heavy repetition of certain actions or inputs, input of large numerical values, large
complex queries to a database system, etc.
• performance testing - term often used interchangeably with ’stress’ and ‘load’ testing.
Ideally ‘performance’ testing (and any other ‘type’ of testing) is defined in requirements
documentation or QA or Test Plans.
• usability testing - testing for ‘user-friendliness’. Clearly this is subjective, and will
depend on the targeted end-user or customer. User interviews, surveys, video recording
of user sessions, and other techniques can be used. Programmers and testers are usually
not appropriate as usability testers.
• install/uninstall testing - testing of full, partial, or upgrade install/uninstall processes.
• recovery testing - testing how well a system recovers from crashes, hardware failures,
or other catastrophic problems.
• security testing - testing how well the system protects against unauthorized internal or
external access, willful damage, etc; may require sophisticated testing techniques.
• compatability testing - testing how well software performs in a particular
hardware/software/operating system/network/etc. environment.
• exploratory testing - often taken to mean a creative, informal software test that is not
based on formal test plans or test cases; testers may be learning the software as they test
it.
• ad-hoc testing - similar to exploratory testing, but often taken to mean that the testers
have significant understanding of the software before testing it.
• user acceptance testing - determining if software is satisfactory to an end-user or
customer.
• comparison testing - comparing software weaknesses and strengths to competing
products.
• alpha testing - testing of an application when development is nearing completion; minor
design changes may still be made as a result of such testing. Typically done by end-users
or others, not by programmers or testers.
• beta testing - testing when development and testing are essentially completed and final
bugs and problems need to be found before final release. Typically done by end-users or
others, not by programmers or testers.
• mutation testing - a method for determining if a set of test data or test cases is useful, by
deliberately introducing various code changes (’bugs’) and retesting with the original test
data/cases to determine if the ‘bugs’ are detected. Proper implementation requires large
computational resources.

What are 5 common problems in the software development process?

• poor requirements - if requirements are unclear, incomplete, too general, or not testable,
there will be problems.
• unrealistic schedule - if too much work is crammed in too little time, problems are
inevitable.
• inadequate testing - no one will know whether or not the program is any good until the
customer complains or systems crash.
• featuritis - requests to pile on new features after development is underway; extremely
common.
• miscommunication - if developers don’t know what’s needed or customer’s have
erroneous expectations, problems are guaranteed.

What are 5 common solutions to software development problems?

• solid requirements - clear, complete, detailed, cohesive, attainable, testable
requirements that are agreed to by all players. Use prototypes to help nail down
requirements.
• realistic schedules - allow adequate time for planning, design, testing, bug fixing, re-
testing, changes, and documentation; personnel should be able to complete the project
without burning out.
• adequate testing - start testing early on, re-test after fixes or changes, plan for adequate
time for testing and bug-fixing.
• stick to initial requirements as much as possible - be prepared to defend against changes
and additions once development has begun, and be prepared to explain consequences. If
changes are necessary, they should be adequately reflected in related schedule changes. If
possible, use rapid prototyping during the design phase so that customers can see what to
expect. This will provide them a higher comfort level with their requirements decisions
and minimize changes later on.
• communication - require walkthroughs and inspections when appropriate; make
extensive use of group communication tools - e-mail, groupware, networked bug-tracking
tools and change management tools, intranet capabilities, etc.; insure that documentation
is available and up-to-date - preferably electronic, not paper; promote teamwork and
cooperation; use protoypes early on so that customers’ expectations are clarified.

What is software ‘quality’?

Quality software is reasonably bug-free, delivered on time and within budget, meets
requirements and/or expectations, and is maintainable. However, quality is obviously a
subjective term. It will depend on who the ‘customer’ is and their overall influence in the
scheme of things. A wide-angle view of the ‘customers’ of a software development
project might include end-users, customer acceptance testers, customer contract officers,
customer management, the development organization’s
management/accountants/testers/salespeople, future software maintenance engineers,
stockholders, magazine columnists, etc. Each type of ‘customer’ will have their own slant
on ‘quality’ - the accounting department might define quality in terms of profits while an
end-user might define quality as user-friendly and bug-free.

What is ‘good code’?

‘Good code’ is code that works, is bug free, and is readable and maintainable. Some
organizations have coding ’standards’ that all developers are supposed to adhere to, but
everyone has different ideas about what’s best, or what is too many or too few rules.
There are also various theories and metrics, such as McCabe Complexity metrics. It
should be kept in mind that excessive use of standards and rules can stifle productivity
and creativity. ‘Peer reviews’, ‘buddy checks’ code analysis tools, etc. can be used to
check for problems and enforce standards.

For C and C++ coding, here are some typical ideas to consider in setting rules/standards;
these may or may not apply to a particular situation:
• minimize or eliminate use of global variables.
• use descriptive function and method names - use both upper and lower case, avoid
abbreviations, use as many characters as necessary to be adequately descriptive (use of
more than 20 characters is not out of line); be consistent in naming conventions.
• use descriptive variable names - use both upper and lower case, avoid abbreviations, use
as many characters as necessary to be adequately descriptive (use of more than 20
characters is not out of line); be consistent in naming conventions.
• function and method sizes should be minimized; less than 100 lines of code is good, less
than 50 lines is preferable.
• function descriptions should be clearly spelled out in comments preceding a function’s
code.
• organize code for readability.
• use whitespace generously - vertically and horizontally
• each line of code should contain 70 characters max.
• one code statement per line.
• coding style should be consistent throught a program (eg, use of brackets, indentations,
naming conventions, etc.)
• in adding comments, err on the side of too many rather than too few comments; a
common rule of thumb is that there should be at least as many lines of comments
(including header blocks) as lines of code.
• no matter how small, an application should include documentaion of the overall
program function and flow (even a few paragraphs is better than nothing); or if possible a
separate flow chart and detailed program documentation.
• make extensive use of error handling procedures and status and error logging.
• for C++, to minimize complexity and increase maintainability, avoid too many levels of
inheritance in class heirarchies (relative to the size and complexity of the application).
Minimize use of multiple inheritance, and minimize use of operator overloading (note
that the Java programming language eliminates multiple inheritance and operator
overloading.)
• for C++, keep class methods small, less than 50 lines of code per method is preferable.
• for C++, make liberal use of exception handlers

What is ‘good design’?

‘Design’ could refer to many things, but often refers to ‘functional design’ or ‘internal
design’. Good internal design is indicated by software code whose overall structure is
clear, understandable, easily modifiable, and maintainable; is robust with sufficient error-
handling and status logging capability; and works correctly when implemented. Good
functional design is indicated by an application whose functionality can be traced back to
customer and end-user requirements. (See further discussion of functional and internal
design in ‘What’s the big deal about requirements?’ in FAQ #2.) For programs that have
a user interface, it’s often a good idea to assume that the end user will have little
computer knowledge and may not read a user manual or even the on-line help; some
common rules-of-thumb include:
• the program should act in a way that least surprises the user
• it should always be evident to the user what can be done next and how to exit
• the program shouldn’t let the users do something stupid without warning them.

What is SEI? CMM? ISO? IEEE? ANSI? Will it help?

• SEI = ‘Software Engineering Institute’ at Carnegie-Mellon University; initiated by the
U.S. Defense Department to help improve software development processes.
• CMM = ‘Capability Maturity Model’, developed by the SEI. It’s a model of 5 levels of
organizational ‘maturity’ that determine effectiveness in delivering quality software. It is
geared to large organizations such as large U.S. Defense Department contractors.
However, many of the QA processes involved are appropriate to any organization, and if
reasonably applied can be helpful. Organizations can receive CMM ratings by
undergoing assessments by qualified auditors.

Level 1 - characterized by chaos, periodic panics, and heroic efforts required by

individuals to successfully complete projects. Few if any processes in place; successes
may not be repeatable.

Level 2 - software project tracking, requirements management, realistic planning, and

configuration management processes are in place; successful practices can be repeated.

Level 3 - standard software development and maintenance processes are integrated

throughout an organization; a Software Engineering Process Group is is in place to
oversee software processes, and training programs are used to ensure understanding and
compliance.

Level 4 - metrics are used to track productivity, processes, and products. Project
performance is predictable, and quality is consistently high.

Level 5 - the focus is on continouous process improvement. The impact of new processes
and technologies can be predicted and effectively implemented when required.

Perspective on CMM ratings: During 1997-2001, 1018 organizations were assessed. Of

those, 27% were rated at Level 1, 39% at 2, 23% at 3, 6% at 4, and 5% at 5. (For ratings
during the period 1992-96, 62% were at Level 1, 23% at 2, 13% at 3, 2% at 4, and
0.4% at 5.) The median size of organizations was 100 software engineering/maintenance
personnel; 32% of organizations were U.S. federal contractors or agencies. For those
rated at
Level 1, the most problematical key process area was in Software Quality Assurance.

• ISO = ‘International Organisation for Standardization’ - The ISO 9001:2000 standard

(which replaces the previous standard of 1994) concerns quality systems that are assessed
by outside auditors, and it applies to many kinds of production and manufacturing
organizations, not just software. It covers documentation, design, development,
production, testing, installation, servicing, and other processes. The full set of standards
consists of: (a)Q9001-2000 - Quality Management Systems: Requirements; (b)Q9000-
2000 - Quality Management Systems: Fundamentals and Vocabulary; (c)Q9004-2000 -
Quality Management Systems: Guidelines for Performance Improvements. To be ISO
9001 certified, a third-party auditor assesses an organization, and certification is typically
good for about 3 years, after which a complete reassessment is required. Note that ISO
certification does not necessarily indicate quality products - it indicates only that
documented processes are followed. Also see http://www.iso.ch/ for the latest
information. In the U.S. the standards can be purchased via the ASQ web site at http://e-
standards.asq.org/
• IEEE = ‘Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers’ - among other things, creates
standards such as ‘IEEE Standard for Software Test Documentation’ (IEEE/ANSI
Standard 829), ‘IEEE Standard of Software Unit Testing (IEEE/ANSI Standard 1008),
‘IEEE Standard for Software Quality Assurance Plans’ (IEEE/ANSI Standard 730), and
others.

• ANSI = ‘American National Standards Institute’, the primary industrial standards body
in the U.S.; publishes some software-related standards in conjunction with the IEEE and
ASQ (American Society for Quality).

• Other software development process assessment methods besides CMM and ISO 9000
include SPICE, Trillium, TickIT. and Bootstrap.

What is the ’software life cycle’?

The life cycle begins when an application is first conceived and ends when it is no longer
in use. It includes aspects such as initial concept, requirements analysis, functional
design, internal design, documentation planning, test planning, coding, document
preparation, integration, testing, maintenance, updates, retesting, phase-out, and other
aspects.

Will automated testing tools make testing easier?

• Possibly. For small projects, the time needed to learn and implement them may not be
worth it. For larger projects, or on-going long-term projects they can be valuable.
• A common type of automated tool is the ‘record/playback’ type. For example, a tester
could click through all combinations of menu choices, dialog box choices, buttons, etc. in
an application GUI and have them ‘recorded’ and the results logged by a tool. The
‘recording’ is typically in the form of text based on a scripting language that is
interpretable by the testing tool. If new buttons are added, or some underlying code in the
application is changed, etc. the application might then be retested by just ‘playing back’
the ‘recorded’ actions, and comparing the logging results to check effects of the changes.
The problem with such tools is that if there are continual changes to the system being
tested, the ‘recordings’ may have to be changed so much that it becomes very time-
consuming to continuously update the scripts. Additionally, interpretation and analysis of
results (screens, data, logs, etc.) can be a difficult task. Note that there are
record/playback tools for text-based interfaces also, and for all types of platforms.
• Other automated tools can include:
code analyzers - monitor code complexity, adherence to standards, etc.
coverage analyzers - these tools check which parts of the code have been exercised by a
test, and may be oriented to code statement coverage, condition coverage, path coverage,
etc.
memory analyzers - such as bounds-checkers and leak detectors.
load/performance test tools - for testing client/server and web applications under various
load evels.
web test tools - to check that links are valid, HTML code usage is correct, client-side and
server-side programs work, a web site’s interactions are secure.