The point of this follow up is to stress how context is very important. For this presentation, I wrote two remarks:
Their team is currently in situation where developers probably do not do TDD with unit testing, so they moved writing regression tests to scenario end-to-end test. Testers love that developer trap, because "manual testing" is obsolete, and we are better testers with programming. My advice for next step would be to move regression test to lover levels, e.g. do database model tests next to code that describes model. And they should start develop testing strategy around Heuristic Test Strategy Model.
Leda contacted me over Linked in with following clarifications on their testers team context:
- they have several test teams, one of them is creating test plan based on HTSM. Based on that plan, they create various test sessions around risks. For example, they have test session that cover risk about regression changes in software
- some developer do TDD with mission of detecting which part of software regressed
- I forgot to mention one important metric that they measure: on which environment test failed.
- fail result provides information about business logic that failed.
That context was on presentation slide about context. Her point was that I should asked for more clarification after the presentation. It is important to state that she asked us that we do not ask questions during the presentation.
I think that presenter should allow questions during the presentation, if this is a meetup format. Meetup presentations yearn for real time questions. On meetup, you can get for free feedback on your presentation, and explain the possible missing parts. And your presentation could be refactored to become better material for the possible conference submission.
Doing that, my original blog post could contain this follow up information on how important is software testing context.