Author Archive

Review of properties in Kaner’s What is a Good Test Case? Rikard Edgren 5 Comments

One of Cem Kaner’s many classic writings is “What is a Good Test Case?” It is a very good article, well-spent time for anyone involved in software testing. But when writing about test ideas, I started to realize that the list of properties for good test cases isn’t perfect, for me. So it’s time for […]

Sampling & Serendipity Rikard Edgren 3 Comments

“Testing can’t be complete” might be the only statement all testers would agree upon. This means that we only will run a few of all possible tests, and this is in many fields called sampling. There isn’t too much said about qualitative sampling in software testing, so let’s look at what Grounded Theory says about […]

Did Beatles use Kanban? Rikard Edgren 10 Comments

I have become allergic to models that are brought from other industries, and put on software testing as a best practice, or something really good. Software testing is unique, and you might violate important aspects when applying a template that doesn’t match. It is a big difference between producing 100,000 cars a year, and one piece […]

The details and the whole Rikard Edgren 5 Comments

Testers are often in a unique position because we know a lot about the system as a whole, but also a lot about the details of the operating software. There are interesting dynamics between the small and the large, and with a human mind in between, a lot of important information will emerge. “The distinction […]

Is your testing saturated? Rikard Edgren 7 Comments

There are many names for software testing strategies/activities/ approaches/processes; they can be risk-based, coverage-focused, exploratory, requirements-based, Super-TPI, TMM 5 et.al. The names generally come from how the testing is performed or initiated, so I thought we should look at it from another angle, from the end of testing, from the results that we might know […]

Exploratory Testing is not a controlled process Rikard Edgren 8 Comments

Exploratory Testing is not as widely used as it could be, because management doesn’t want it. Stated reasons for this could be unaccountable, unstructured, sloppy, non-scientific etc, reasons that can be refuted by communication. But I think the real reason is something Exploratory Testing can’t have: a controlled process. Management/Companies want to have a plan […]

Testing Clichés Part III: “We can’t test those requirements” Rikard Edgren 12 Comments

It is good to strive for better requirements by critical analysis (and looking for what’s missing), but there is a danger in complaining about untestable requirements. If those vague requirements are changed (made too specific) or removed, the words in the requirements document have less meaning, and less chance of guiding towards great software. And […]

Turns out I’m not a context-driven tester… Rikard Edgren 8 Comments

In many years I have loved most of what is written by the people behind the context-driven school of testing. But I have also felt that there is something that isn’t a perfect match. For a time I thought it was because I saw a few different tries to push people to different schools – […]

Vancouver 2010 Biathlon Software Rikard Edgren 5 Comments

As a Swede, the winter Olympics are fun to watch. Most sports aren’t spread across the globe, so we have chances for medals. One of the most exciting events are the Biathlon, and perhaps it was a reaction to disappointing results for the Swedish ladies, but I got really upset at the software: The numbers […]

More Definitions of Quality Rikard Edgren 12 Comments

I grew up in a small “town” in Värmland. Outside the village, most people live in isolated houses/farms on the countryside or in the woods. If you’d ask one of these persons what quality is, they would answer: dä ä väl att fôlk töcker att dä ä bra (guess it’s that people like it) This […]