Ok--Scratch that. -Please review this

Draft 2


"We may be through with the past, but the past ain't through with us." Magnolia (1999)

How are you dealing with your existing test cases, and what does this have to do with the future of testing? Unless you are on a new product without any existing test cases, you may have some test case bloat you are carrying around with you. All of the time that you spend dealing with the quality of existing code is directly taking time away from developing and testing innovative new features and software. In short, the past may be hampering or even preventing you from having a future.

I'll discuss six different strategies which can be used either in combination or alone, the barriers to ruthless reduction, many ways to identify the keepers, and a few strategies for letting go. Once you decide on a reduction strategy it may be difficult to execute on unless you deal with the emotional attachment and fear that comes with leaving what some consider "needed survival supplies" behind. In addition to sharing many methods for reducing test case bloat, we'll discuss reducing duplication in the form of trusting the automation, trusting other teams, and finding areas of overlap. Find out why more is not better and go home with a goal to test less. If you are covering what is most critical, reducing testing where the priority is lower can result in improved efficiency while maintaining excellent quality.

First Draft Below

"We may be through with the past, but the past ain't through with us." Magnolia (1999)

Picture two groups of plane crash survivors suddenly stranded together in a remote location, a few survivors out of hundreds, yet somehow all of the luggage has made it through unscathed. These groups of people must travel to make it out of the wilderness effectively together, with as many of them as possible surviving. Group 1 takes all of the luggage, distributes it equally on to the backs of each member, and as a member falls to being eaten by predators, hunger, or injury, they redistribute the load on to the remaining survivors risking more fatigue and injury. The forward progress is hampered by the weight of the supplies they have with them.

Having seen this strategy fail, Group 2 instead gathers information about where they are and what is likely to be found along the way, assesses the ability to safely carry the load, and distributes items based on need and ability. As members fall, they ruthlessly cull through the items, balancing the need for forward progress with the need for the items they will carry for their ultimate survival. In the end, a strategy is not enough. A well muscled person from Group 1 may emerge victorious with a huge pile, where an unmotivated and injured person from Group 2 may not make it, however, the odds are in the favor of Group 2.  Not only is Group 2 more likely to get out of the Wilderness alive and far ahead of Group1, but they are more likely to be healthier, happier, and working well as a team.

So, how are you dealing with your existing test cases, and what does this have to do with the future of testing? Unless you are on a new product without any existing test cases, you may have some test case bloat you may be carrying around with you. In this paper I'll go over the options, the barriers to ruthless reduction, the ways to identify the keepers, and strategies for letting go. Once you make a strategy it may be difficult to execute on unless you deal with the emotional attachment and fear that comes with leaving what some consider "needed survival supplies" behind. In addition to sharing many methods for reducing test case bloat, we'll discuss reducing duplication in the form of trusting the automation, trusting other teams, and finding areas of overlap. Find out why more is not better and go home with a goal to test less. If you are covering what is most critical, not testing the rest can be an excellent decision.