|
From: | Przemysław Wojnowski |
Subject: | Re: burden of maintainance |
Date: | Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:34:41 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 |
as the burden of maintainance was mentioned: from reading the bug-reports got the impression, a more strict test-regime might reduce that. If a bug shows up, the first question should be: how it could survive the tests?
+1 In previous project I joined a team that couldn't do any release in 4 years. I've introduced automated tests and refactoring among other things and after 2 years we were releasing 4 times a year, with 3 times less defects, found much sooner in release cycle and they were easier to fix. Some people here work in academia so maybe don't have such experiences, but in software industry automated tests are a standard. Projects without (or with weak) tests are replaced with those having strong tests.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |