When is it time to stop testing your software?

We should always have a list of must have quality standards to represent your brand or team, for eg, it should be free of spelling mistakes, and it should be visually appealing to the viewers. At every step of the software development cycle, high quality standards must be adhered to and should not have any excuses for defects to creep in. Otherwise, it will have inherent quality defects that will incur expensive technical debt later. We have seen so many software and applications that had frequent bug fixes and bug fixes on top of previous bug fixes. This is obviously a quality issue.

Stop testing ? Never. IMO, the right way to build software is two-track: each upgrade/incremental patch or extension*MUST* include sample code on how to use it, or, if it's a bugfix, sample code that provokes the bug. These examples / tests ship with the product, and there's a script that runs them all (yes, *all*. No shortcuts.) and matches the expected output with the actual output. This two-track method -- the code you use, and the code that tests the code you use being equally important -- brings a huge head start on assuring the highest quality for the end user.

In my opinion, in today’s world of rapidly changing requirements and therefore frequent changes to software, testing never stops. With every small change that comes in - not only in the software under test, but also in peer services - automated unit- and integration testing should happen to catch any potential deviations from expected behavior. Building up the automated testing framework should IMO start at the time you start developing a service. That means some additional investment of course, and one has to make sure to not overachieve, but later one it pays off. And keeping tests up to date during the lifetime of a service is from what I’ve seen not that big of an effort. Just needs some discipline ??

Some common factors that can help: - The deadline reached or approaching. - The test cases have been completed with a prescribed pass percentage or coverage. - The testing budget. - The defect rate has decreased to an acceptable level or has reached a plateau. - The mean time between failures (MTBF). - The risk level of the software. Of course, these factors may vary depending on the nature, scope, and complexity of the software, but process. Then you can ensure that you stop testing at the right time, without compromising the quality of the software or wasting resources.

Stop testing if you know your tests aren't stable and they are not fixable! Unstable tests bring more confusion than confidence. Don't keep those tests alive and run them with the hope of passing. It adds lots of waste of resource to your project.

100% coverage needs further definition before it can be claimed. Functional safety standards (DO-178C, ISO 26262, IEC61508, EN50128, and so on) each have distinct requirements on coverage and different functions may be tested with different levels of rigour in accordance with their criticality. Remember that 100% line execution coverage won't achieve "100% coverage".

Test coverage is important and should not be taken for granted. However, test coverage is not always to be attained by writing more tests. Sometimes, you only need to delete some code. There are parts of the codebase that are practically unreachable or have fallen into disuse. Writing more tests for them is a waste of resources. Don't be afraid to delete code or sunset the part of the product that bears no fruit.

It is not like you start testing at the end. Test every tiny change/addition while writing. That is: keep the test scope as small as possible and test EVERYTHING in that small scope you just added/changed. Then, the whole will work. If you test at the end, finding errors is MUCH more difficult. So, start testing immediately and continuously, then at the end there is little to test and you can stop testing immediately.

In my opinion software testing should never stop. It is a continous process throughout the lifecycle of the software. Although I am not a fan of test driven development (mainly because I haven't heard of a project that has good enough requirements to enable proper TDD from start) testing the smallest units of code help immensly in rooting out a lot of bugs. Adding a good set of integration tests on top of that creates projects with great coverage and decent quality. Chasing 100% coverage can be time consuming and pointless. Try to follow 80/20 rule and add regression tests as bugs are found and fixed. If you have even more time add some fuzzy tests too. Run tests on each push and know you are doing more than 60% of projects out there.

A fully tested codebase is much better than one that is 50% tested. Coverage doesn’t write tests for you but can be an invaluable tool to have insights into what is being tested. If you’re coding on the frontend with React checkout Jest with React Testing Library (RTL). Enzyme is another good option. These unit test libraries coupled with Istanbul code coverage can help you quickly identify what needs to be tested. You’d be surprised just how much code coverage you’ll get by writing a sanity test which tests that the component or screen gets loaded properly.

Testing can be very resource intensive and also time consuming. I would advise to invest the time early on to automate as much as possible of the testing required. This will be very efficient on the long term from resource perspective but also to provide efficiency and consistency of testing and quality. How about you, please provide your feedback on the best tips on managing testing resources to balance demand and delivery...

Testing takes time and effort. It also saves more time and wasted effort compared to not testing, or insufficient testing. We always need testing, and we should also always be teaching other people how to use tests too.

The rational conclusion of testing activities is closely tied to the efficient utilization of testing resources. In reality, the availability of time, budget, personnel, tools, and infrastructure is finite. Therefore, the decision of when to cease testing requires a precise analysis and optimal resource utilization. This process involves continuous monitoring of testing resources within the evolving project context to balance costs and benefits. Clear priorities and adaptability are crucial to streamline the testing process and ensure that available resources are utilized optimally.

Ministry of Testing provides a wealth of testing resources and a supportive community. The Test Huddle blog covers various testing topics. Join forums like Stack Overflow and Reddit for discussions and problem-solving. LinkedIn groups and local meetups can connect you with other testing professionals.

Testing, just like all aspects of a project must be cost efficient. Effective engineering leaders must find the fine balance between testing and costs and decide what is enough for the project at hand.

In the onset of testing, one would most certainly different categories of defects, but with time and continuous improvements the rate of new defect discovery would decrease. Monitoring this rate could play a significant role in deciding when to stop testing, and judging if the software is approaching a desired level of quality.

Ao considerar o feedback do teste, a determina??o de quando encerrar os testes é guiada pelas informa??es coletadas, como número e gravidade de defeitos, taxas de detec??o e resolu??o, execu??o e conclus?o do teste, indicadores de qualidade e eficácia, além do nível de satisfa??o e aceita??o dos usuários e partes interessadas. Esses insights valiosos oferecem uma avalia??o da qualidade e prontid?o do software, identificando lacunas e problemas a serem resolvidos. O encerramento dos testes ocorre quando o feedback indica que o software atende aos padr?es e requisitos estabelecidos, proporcionando confian?a na sua eficácia. #FeedbackDeTeste #QualidadeDoSoftware

Considering feedback is a key factor in deciding when to wrap up testing. Feedback includes data on defects, test execution rates, and user satisfaction. This information gives insights into the software's quality and readiness. Paying attention to feedback helps identify and fix any remaining issues before concluding testing.

Mais uma vez, o feedback n?o regra a hora de parar, visto que depende do software desenvolvido. o feedback real e bem alinhado com todos os 'heads' do projeto pode sim colocar um final no projeto, n?o só nos testes mas como no desenvolvimento, se o nível satisfatório foi alcan?ado, isso significa muitas vezes que o cliente n?o esta mais disposto a desprender verba e ou já esta satisfeito com o que foi entregue.

For a particular release version of the software testing should stop when all tests pass. Having a solid set of tests requires good knowledge of the domain, good requirements, and commitment to quality.

Understanding what you have puts you in a good position throughout any project. It's more acceptable to provide something imperfect and understood than to not provide anything, or provide something not measured. In the development of an embedded system, it's often necessary to develop hardware and software together, so imperfect or incomplete software still has use -- as long as it is understood.

Ao abordar os riscos de teste, a decis?o de encerrar os testes é moldada pela avalia??o e gerenciamento das potenciais consequências negativas associadas ao software e às atividades de teste. Estes riscos incluem falhas, erros, defeitos, atrasos, retrabalho, insatisfa??o, reclama??es ou a??es judiciais, podendo impactar qualidade, desempenho, usabilidade, seguran?a e reputa??o do software, assim como custos, cronogramas, recursos e resultados do projeto. Identificar, analisar, avaliar e mitigar esses riscos s?o passos essenciais para determinar o nível aceitável de risco para o projeto, influenciando diretamente a conclus?o ou continuidade dos testes. #RiscosDeTeste #Gest?oDeRiscos

It is crucial to adopt a comprehensive risk management approach to effectively manage testing risks throughout the software development life cycle. One needs to define an acceptable level of risks for the project, and the decision to stop testing could be made once the high-priority risks have been addressed. It is critical to continue to monitor risks and revisit the question however, as the software development is continuously evolving and some issues could surface again down the road.

According to me, testing objectives serve as a compass for testing activities, guiding the team toward the successful verification and validation of the software. Well-defined objectives contribute to the overall success of the project by ensuring that testing efforts are purposeful, aligned with stakeholder expectations, and focused on delivering a high-quality product on time and within budget.

When to stop testing depends on whether you've achieved the goals you set. Goals could include making sure the software works well, fixing any problems, and meeting user expectations.

Certainly, the cessation of testing our software aligns with the accomplishment of testing objectives, functional requirements, and non-functional requirements, signifying the attainment of our ultimate goal. This helps more specifically in case of Hotfix or Patch releases which can't go to full testing lifecycle and have time constraints.

Of course, testing never stops for actively developed software and it should be a continuous process. For any project, full test automation should be an integral part of the CI/CD pipeline. However, manual testing still has its place. Especially for exploratory testing of new functionality.

Stop testing your software when you stop changing the software. In other words, test your software with every change. Your software is probably never "done" so you continue to test your software. If you stop getting requests to change your software, you better create a new product. Your software is not being used (hat tip Uncle Bob).

One thing that I have found useful is tracking the delivery of features, sprint after sprint and then measuring the extent of defects resulting from the test results from the various quality checkpoints like performance, automation, security etc. There should be an upward trend with every sprint in terms of quality delivered. If the observed test results are consistent to the expectation, defined SLAs, non-functional requirements etc. and present a consistent test results which is repeatable with no major defect and minimal to 0 minor defects; it lays out a solid foundation to think towards concluding the testing.

Testing should be planned at the start of the project, and as part of the plan you need to define the success criteria. A common success criteria that I used: 1. Coverage of all new features 2. Full regression of the features that might have been impacted 3. Quality convergence - number of defects found through the round of testing is trending down

Stop testing your software bug free and secure ?? excited load balancer. All of exception handle properly. User happy to use application