So did you see all this hoo-ha last month about the various “schools” of testing? You’ve got your context-driven school, your…um…not-context-driven school (I guess), and so on, ad nauseum. Whenever I see these kinds of philosophical debates, my most frequent reaction is, “Wow…how come everybody’s arguing and nobody’s actually testing?”
I mean, seriously. It must be nice to have time to argue about which testing approach is best and what it should be called. Meanwhile, the vast majority of testers that I know are busy trying to justify our very existence to a software industry that still mostly misunderstands us and our role. What “school” of testing you consider yourself a member of really doesn’t mean squat when you’re told that “the client is refusing to pay for any more testing,” and when testing does need to occur, “we’ll just let the marketing guys pound on it for a few hours.” I’d love to know where these mythical projects and companies are, where testing is seen as integral to the effort, and there’s always time and money budgeted for it. Enough time, apparently, for the practitioners to engage in a war of words over whose school is best!
Call me cranky, but these days, I’m kind of just happy to have a job.