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

Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Dedicate Tester in an Agile Team

Expand Messages
  • Michael James
    I also prefer generalists (in general!), but specialists need not be forced to be generalists to do Scrum. --mj
    Message 1 of 24 , Apr 18 5:49 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      I also prefer generalists (in general!), but specialists need not be
      forced to be generalists to do Scrum.

      --mj
    • andaluri sai prasad
      Hi Thank you . This is clear. ... -- ANDALURI
      Message 2 of 24 , Apr 20 12:52 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi
         
        Thank you . This is clear.

        On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 7:53 PM, davenicolette <dnicolet@...> wrote:


        Hi Sivaram,

        If my understanding of Scrum is correct, then the guideline is that teams should include all the skills necessary to deliver the product; teams are cross-functional. Scrum itself doesn't dictate exactly how to achieve that. Team members who are individually multi-skilled is often a very good way to do it, but I don't think that's actually defined in Scrum as such. It would still be consistent with Scrum if you had a team comprising individual experts in each required discipline.

        So, if your team members have both development and testing skills, that's fine. If your team includes some developers who aren't skilled at testing, and some testers who aren't skilled at development, that's also fine as far as Scrum guidelines are concerned (although I personally think the former model is more effective for general business application development, which rarely demands narrow-and-deep specialized skills).

        Cheers,
        Dave



        --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, andaluri sai prasad <andaluris@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi
        >
        > But as per Scrum guide lines , is it suggestable to have a dedicated tester
        > . Scrum says the team should have
        > members who are multi skilled.
        >
        > -Sivaram
        >
        >
        >
        > On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 8:36 AM, George Dinwiddie
        > <lists@...>wrote:

        >
        > >
        > >
        > > brian_bofu wrote:
        > > > We're using Scrum and TDD. But I heard from some team members that
        > > > they'd like to have a tester who could look at the application in a
        > > > different angel. I'm bit curious, in an Agile environment, would a
        > > > dedicate tester be a great helpful with respect to the quality?
        > > > What's your thoughts?
        > >
        > > I've found that having a dedicated tester (or several) on the team pays
        > > big dividends. They bring a viewpoint similar to the product owner
        > > angle, bit with more depth and variety of considerations. This is
        > > really helpful for coming up with acceptance criteria for a story that
        > > will hold up under real-world usage.
        > >
        > > They can also help (often with a developer) automate regression scripts.
        > >
        > > - George
        > >
        > > --
        > > ----------------------------------------------------------
        > > * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
        > > Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
        > > Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
        > > ----------------------------------------------------------
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >




        --
        ANDALURI
      • Sean Hart
        Well put. QA is important to reconcile the product being shipped with the wants/needs of the business. Ideally, in addition to being part of the team, QA
        Message 3 of 24 , Apr 24 8:24 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Well put. QA is important to reconcile the product being shipped with the wants/needs of the business. Ideally, in addition to being part of the team, QA folks should work with the PO and the customer during backlog creation. It's amazing the kinds of ambiguities you can avoid if you identify and resolve them before they get to the team. QA has to be both pig and chicken (picken?) in a sense. This makes for a very busy quality assurance staff, but do it right and you have a much happier and more productive team as a result.


          --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Cenk Çivici <cenk.civici@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hi,
          >
          > TDD with unit testing is for building the code right
          > Acceptance Testing and QAs are for building the right code..
          >
          > Cheers
          > Cenk
          >
          > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:11 AM, brian_bofu <brian_bofu@...> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > Hi there,
          > >
          > > We're using Scrum and TDD. But I heard from some team members that they'd
          > > like to have a tester who could look at the application in a different
          > > angel. I'm bit curious, in an Agile environment, would a dedicate tester be
          > > a great helpful with respect to the quality? What's your thoughts?
          > >
          > > Regards,
          > >
          > > Brian
          > >
          > >
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.