Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

The important thing is that we're being "Agile".

The managers and leads have no idea of this mess, but in my opinion, the testing scripts needed to be QA'd as well, so double the work. There are also other potential risks that we don't care about looking into like possibility of incorrect or misaligned input data for testing and the scripts could not tell. I miss the old manual ways where talented QA testers could easily complete tests. I didn't care when their tests couldn't pass their rigid checks and they issued me a bug fix, but I felt safer that my code has been correctly QA'd. Oh well

If automation scripts/code we developed has full of bugs, then what tool to use to test automated scripts. Whom to report, who has to check this and how? Where is the automation manager? Does current development manager have any knowledge on testing or automation?

TDD eliminates the need for additional functional (QA) testing assuming the people writing the scenarios are competent enough to do so. Regression testing should be automated since you're just making sure nothing is broken. It doesn't eliminate the need for people to understand QA testing, it simply means you don't want people around that have a limited skillset.

You guys are thinking about this all wrong. Hudson Yards doesn't care if it 'works' in the common sense way. The only real question is "does it allow us to downsize our US workforce?" If the answer to that is "yes", then it "works" just fine for Scharf.

Yeah, big mistake for my team to join the automated testing bandwagon. We forced our QA Testers to become Software Engineers, otherwise they're chopped. And then everybody was developing automated tests, and I for the most part, developing the automated tests were A LOT MORE difficult than the change we were supposed to test. What the hhheeckkk. And I can also tell you that the automated testing scripts that we developed to do the tests were full of bugs. So what's the point.

Could see where automation applies for things that don't change much when code changes occur, like simulating rapid user logons w/ test accounts, etc.

I'm not in a coding role but we've been asked to automate deployments to key infrastructure machines where the update is once and never again done again. There is no benefit to automation if the use is temporary and low volume.

The only true reason to want full automation without considering the context is to water everyone down enough to be replaceable. Subject Matter Experts need not apply!

Would the national embarrassment we suffered this weekend have occurred if we had our QA testers AND our Enterprise end-to-end testing practices in place?

You mean a tool to figure out the total permutations and combinations based on the number of conditions in a given rule or rule set?

Hopefully we can work on tools to automate the staging of data to meet every possible scenario.

When the let all QA go, they made a mistake. You don’t get what you expect when you don’t inspect and AI or “automation” for testing doesn’t work.

Have they gotten that selenium framework working yet?

One of the biggest mistake is removing QA wing. Automation is suitable only for regression. Hope they will realize this soon. It is impossible to replace manual testing with human brain.

Amen. Like other changes, this push for automation seems to be coming from leaders with no hands-on experience.

I developed automated testing years ago. It took a lot of ongoing work to manage and tweak. You're simply shifting resource hours from QA to developers. Also, you lose the intangibles. A good tester can "feel" when something is wrong with the system.

Hot take - automated testing doesn’t work