• cheddar
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    That sounds strange. I cannot comment on your particular case without seeing the test artifacts.

    Generally speaking, there is nothing wrong with tests that ensure bad input doesn’t break the system, as this can easily lead to incorrect system states, damage to the environment, loss of data, money, reputation, and even lives - although most systems are not critical enough to threaten lives.

    You wouldn’t need QAs if you only needed to validate that the product meets the requirements. In a typical company, many people are involved in that process. This includes the developer who wrote the code, the developer who reviewed it, and the people who conduct acceptance testing, among others. If your developers produce code that doesn’t meet the requirements, you’re in trouble.

    I’m not saying that QA shouldn’t validate whether the system meets the requirements, but you don’t want them to do just that.

    • psud@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      If they didn’t properly test validation I would complain about that, what that regularly miss is a test showing correct function for each major use case

      • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        So it sounds like you need to use the words to tell them, do you know testing types and strategies so you can tell them which to employ?