Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

OID

Expand Messages
  • Sandeep Sapre
      Hello Experts,   I am the member of OID work group committe.   We have started implementing Unit Testing Tool (.NET) as we found  from DRE that defects
    Message 1 of 4 , Jun 30, 2008
       
      Hello Experts,
       
      I am the member of OID work group committe.
       
      We have started implementing Unit Testing Tool (.NET) as we found  from DRE that defects are more due to unit test cases are not written and properly executed. This was based on 6 DRE's at organization level and now after 13 DRE preparation we are coming with result of Coding and logic issues as culprit instead of unit test case.
       
      Meanwhile we have selected project for Unit test tool implemenation and prepared pilot plan also.... We do not have PPM established.
       
      We have Quality objective defined as 0.001 % defect leakage.
       
      My question is that,
       
      1.If decide to  proceed with implementing Unit testing tool for .NET projects as those are focused one , how can show it as innovation.
       
      2. If we treat this as Benchmarking then how can map it to business goal or quality and process performance objectives as we earlier we were doing manual unit test cases.
       
      I hope you have understood scanario.
       
      Thanks,
       
      Sandeep




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Murali Chemuturi
      Sandeep Implementing a tool doesn t come under innovation. Tool doesn t generate test cases on its own - they still have to be fed in manually.It would not
      Message 2 of 4 , Jul 7, 2008
        Sandeep


        Implementing a tool doesn't come under innovation. Tool doesn't generate test cases on its own - they still have to be fed in manually.It would not solve your problem of missing test cases - it resolves your problem of test case execution - that too if it is an automated test tool. If coding and logic are the culprits, it indicates that your coding guidelines are to be improved and your design documents are to be improved. The tool would be a palliative but not the solution. Proper analysis doesn't seem to have taken place. Did you do defect analysis?

        You can not treat this as benchmarking also. Internal benchmarking involves comparing with other projects / divisions/business units etc and external benchmarking involves comparing with similar organizations. Benchmarking involves comparison and analyzing your position in the desired area - using quantitative data.

        Your defect leakage 0.001% - or one defect every thousand lines is between 3 and 4 sigma is very low target.
        Best wishes for your success

        Murali Chemuturi
        www.metricssoftware.com
        91-40-2722 0771
        98850-19461
        USA - 347-394-3138

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Sandeep Sapre
        To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 5:43 PM
        Subject: Fw: [CMMi Process Improvement] OID





        Hello Experts,

        I am the member of OID work group committe.

        We have started implementing Unit Testing Tool (.NET) as we found from DRE that defects are more due to unit test cases are not written and properly executed. This was based on 6 DRE's at organization level and now after 13 DRE preparation we are coming with result of Coding and logic issues as culprit instead of unit test case.

        Meanwhile we have selected project for Unit test tool implemenation and prepared pilot plan also.... We do not have PPM established.

        We have Quality objective defined as 0.001 % defect leakage.

        My question is that,

        1.If decide to proceed with implementing Unit testing tool for .NET projects as those are focused one , how can show it as innovation.

        2. If we treat this as Benchmarking then how can map it to business goal or quality and process performance objectives as we earlier we were doing manual unit test cases.

        I hope you have understood scanario.

        Thanks,

        Sandeep

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.