SPONSORS:






User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    765
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Failing a test case over a typo

    I am having a bit of a mental dilemma and would welcome your thoughts.

    I'm working with a team that have to use the IBM Rational Test Manager system and the process they have insists that all defects MUST relate to a failed Test Case.

    My dilemma is that I have a test case to check a bit of functionality. The function passes the test but I noticed a typo while doing the test. My usual process is to pass the test and to raise a defect for the typo.

    But as every defect has to be assigned to a test case I either need to:
    1) create a new test case relating to the typo, fail that and raise the defect against it.
    2) fail the current test case.

    If I go down route 1, I could end up with a billion test cases that effectively duplicate defects.

    If I do down route 2, I will have to rerun the whole test case (1 hour) instead of just retesting the typo (30 seconds). It also gives a false view of the current completeness of the application and the testing.

    I just wondered what others do in this situation.
    Everywhere's within walking distance if you have enough time.

  2. #2
    Moderator JakeBrake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    St. Louis - Year 2025
    Posts
    15,609
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Failing a test case over a typo

    What about suggesting a general "typo" bucket?

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Essex, England
    Posts
    4
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Failing a test case over a typo

    Hi,

    How about creating a single new test case to check the spelling all over the application (effectively a placeholder) and fail that one test case against the defect you've raised.

    Alternatively, break down the application into sections and create different test cases to check the spelling in different parts.

  4. #4
    Moderator Joe Strazzere's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    13,170
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Failing a test case over a typo

    [ QUOTE ]
    But as every defect has to be assigned to a test case

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Why?
    Is that some sort of IBM Rational Test Manager requirement?
    Or is that a process requirement at your shop.

    Either way, it seems like an odd requirement.

    Can you create a "Miscellaneous bugs" test case, that doesn't require you to retest every bug you found?
    Joe Strazzere
    Visit my website: AllThingsQuality.com to learn more about quality, testing, and QA!

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    3,628
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Failing a test case over a typo

    I would opt for #1, but with a slight adjustment. Why does there need to be a separate test case for each and every word in the application? Would there be a way to create a test case per screen? If you did it that way, you might wind up with a hundred? Maybe less?

    This is generally what I will do with my translations. I have a test case set up for each screen in each language. So I'll flip the language, whip through and verify that all strings are translated, pick out the ones that aren't, fail those test cases individually, and pass the rest. You could do the same thing yourself, I suppose. This is also an area we test only once or twice a release cycle. It's usually the first thing that we drop when we start our risk evaluation.
    Brent
    --------------------
    9 out of 10 people I prove wrong agree that I'm right. The other person is my wife.
    --------------------

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    238
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Failing a test case over a typo

    I agree that it seems odd that you cannot enter a defect without linking to a test case. In my shop, we would enter the defect in Quality Center without a test case ID attached and then write a test to cover it after that cycle of testing. That way we have a test case to run in order to verify the fix in future builds.
    -Troy
    Do or do not... there is no try. -Yoda

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    30
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Failing a test case over a typo

    Hmm! An issue related to test case coverage, in my opinion. Ideally, I would opt for test cases that would also cover all user interfacing text (spelling, grammar, punctuation,etc)[But, obviously, that will depend on the availability of resources and the visibility of the requirements.]

    Now, the question of granularity of test cases comes. Like, a single test case for each sentence or a single test case for a single screen (or for the entire application, for the extremes). I would suggest that you choose neither of the extremes but instead come up with test cases that balance the extremes. Your call.

    And, oh, I feel we do need to strive towards associating each defect with a test case/s. Traceability. Accountability. Authenticity.

  8. #8
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    765
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Failing a test case over a typo

    Thanks for your thoughts.

    The defect/test case rule is specific to this organisation, it's part of a methodology they bought.
    It's not what I'd do, I'd rather we focussed on finding bugs rather than on making sure everything is correctly linked together and named.
    But they spent a lot of time and money on this process and I'm not able to change it.

    My solution, and suggested by many people, was to create a test case just for the appearance. I passed the test case relating to the functionality, but failed this new test case because of the typo.

    I also created a test case 'exploratory testing' because the other process made me want to cry.

    Thanks again for your input.
    Everywhere's within walking distance if you have enough time.

  9. #9
    Moderator Joe Strazzere's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    13,170
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Failing a test case over a typo

    [ QUOTE ]
    I also created a test case 'exploratory testing' because the other process made me want to cry.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
    Sometimes we do what we have to do, just to get by!

    Good solution.
    Joe Strazzere
    Visit my website: AllThingsQuality.com to learn more about quality, testing, and QA!

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    38
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Failing a test case over a typo

    [ QUOTE ]
    I would opt for #1, but with a slight adjustment. Why does there need to be a separate test case for each and every word in the application? Would there be a way to create a test case per screen? If you did it that way, you might wind up with a hundred? Maybe less?

    [/ QUOTE ]This is generally how I handle it too. There are times when large pieces of functionality in applications testing will fall under the same umbrella, and in those cases I do the same but broaden it from 'per screen' to 'per module'.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.36 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 8.82%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise v2.6.4 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.2.8 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBNominate (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Username Changing provided by Username Change (Free) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
BetaSoft Inc.
Digital Point modules: Sphinx-based search
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:09 AM.

Copyright BetaSoft Inc.