Latest Stories

Hans Buwalda highlights the scalability of unit, functional, and exploratory tests—the three kinds of tests used to verify functionality. Since many automation tools and strategies traditionally focus on functional testing, Hans provides some strategies to make functional testing more manageable.

TechWell is highlighting the strides women have made in the growing testing profession by featuring the Women Who Test summit at STARWEST. This full-day event, which will be October 2, is aimed toward women in the industry looking to network with other women passionate about software testing.

With the DevOps movement and push for continuous delivery, the way we have done test automation in the past must evolve. In continuous testing, tests are run as part the build pipeline so that every check-in and deployment is validated. Learn more to ensure your team can achieve continuous testing.

Too often when people address a conflict, they take an I-win-you-lose approach. That distracts from focusing on opportunities for agreement and can make ongoing relationships difficult. When people have to work together, the wise approach is one that serves the best interests of both parties.

Manual testers are experts at the unexpected, while automation is all about predictability. Automation won’t replace manual testing, but neither will manual testing replace automation. Linda Hayes writes that once the difference between them is understood, the fear of automation dissolves.

Testers in every project and company spend time defining and debating the meaning of common testing terms. Which labels are used for testing activities tend to vary from team to team. How do you reach an understanding? Dawn Haynes addresses the disparities and highlights what's really important.

When it comes to DevOps, the goal is to move applications from development, to test, and then eventually to deployment as quickly and efficiently as possible. However, you can still be agile while having a safe, properly security-tested DevOps environment.

At work, the evidence of something worth paying attention to is often front and center, and yet we dismiss it. If you ignore the data—negative survey results, team member absences, an increase in bugs, stakeholders who repeatedly miss meetings, etc.—you could be overlooking signs of trouble.

Some problems we can resolve on our own in a couple of minutes. Some take more time, or we can’t resolve them alone. What do you do then? Johanna Rothman suggests scheduling a timebox to find a solution alone, then if that doesn't work, using one of the ideas in this story to "unstick" yourself.

Large companies have long used bug bounty programs to find vulnerabilities in their software, but these initiatives are becoming increasingly common among individual developers, too. Should a small business use a bug bounty program? And could it even replace their in-house testing? Should it?