Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: "why we all sell code with bugs"
- (responding to Dave)> Our goal is 100% defect free. Given all I have said above, how> can I have this as a goal? At the risk of sounding like a> motivational poster, 100% quality is a journey not a destination.> It is a great thing to aim for. It makes you focus on getting> your QA as good as it possibly can get rather than as good> as it needs to be. Just bear in mind that until you reach 100%> quality you need to make those risk calls. Will we ever get> to 100%? I don’t think so. There will always be room to> improve. In all honesty can you look at your QA and say> that there is nothing you can do better? Having 100% as a> goal lets us keep making those improvements. And yes, to> those who have said it, this includes process changes to> prevent defects as well as QA changes to find them.That sounds like a fine attitude to have.Agreed we always need to assess risk and value when Considering thefew bugs that do still appear despite our prior efforts to prevent them.However, there should by now be a few 'given' results that apply, thatdidn't apply earlier.First, by now the risk of introducing a new bug when fixing an existingone should be so low as to be negligible. It might still happen, true.Your deadlines may indeed be so critical that you cannot afford totreat that residual risk of introducing a new high severity bug as negligible.Second, even if a decision is made not to fix the bug in the product, theopportunity should be taken to investigate, usually to fix, the bug in theprocess.Paul Oldfield