"So tell me about your last job as QA. How did you get along with the developers?"
"Oh, they fucking hated me"
"You're hired!"
I agree with your points, but neither of these would seem to foster good development skills.Methodical, patient, someone who can detect my bullshit.
I'm not sure I understand your point.isn't test engineer an oxymoron tho
You aren't doing any building, any engineering. You are just testing what somebody else has engineered.I'm not sure I understand your point.
Pretty much this. I'd prefer the focus of a test engineer to code the test system and automation necessary to report failures.Realistically no one in IT are engineers even though we get that title thrown all over the place. Not a single one of us has a PE license.
A real test engineer should actually "engineer" the testing environment by writing the code necessary to perform all the unit tests in a specific manner and report out on the results. They used to write automation that would actually check for standards based shit too like readability and what not.
Obviously though there is a big spectrum of duties. One test engineer might do really dumb shit like make sure all the buttons work to more middle of the road shit like run some default HP Quality Center or Selenium tests.
I agree with your points, but neither of these would seem to foster good development skills.
If that's your expectation of a QA position, then that's fine. Some people expect them to be good developers too, for better or worse. My product architect and myself being some of those people. The difference is that I'd like to see if that's even reasonable. Maybe expecting them to be good at QA and good at development just isn't possible.You wanted a QA guy right?
If that's your expectation of a QA position, then that's fine. Some people expect them to be good developers too, for better or worse. My product architect and myself being some of those people. The difference is that I'd like to see if that's even reasonable. Maybe expecting them to be good at QA and good at development just isn't possible.
If your QA person is objectively a good developer, as in they are doing good development work in QA, why is that a problem? Pay them as much as a developer.
Pretty much this. I'd prefer the focus of a test engineer to code the test system and automation necessary to report failures.
Some people here expect test engineers to test(manually? semi manually?) development code. I'm not saying that's wrong, but that's definitely a step back from what I'd like to suggest to my boss as to improve expectations and assignments.
Would be cool to see a dictionary attack instead of just hitting a standard ABC word list, but also scanning their entire social media profiles and coming up with it's own personalized dictionary based off of what you care about and what passwords people have used in the past.
The ML program would also learn from previously leaked passwords, scanned profiles from those passwords, and the relationship between the password and their life.
You could draw a better dictionary attack if the computer learned about people and how they chose passwords based on lifestyles and other factors. Shrug
The pen testing people that we hired to test our hub were next to useless. Definitely closer to mindless automatons just following a script. For a software test engineer, I want people that wrote that script and the accompanying software.For sure, but also, when you run a pentest type software on an environment, who is really doing the automation? Are you then more of a puppet master?