Comments for Test Obsessed

Comment on Agile Adjustments: a WordCount Story by Ulrika Malmgren

Ulrika Malmgren — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 12:24:20 +0000

I keep seeing how teams try to solve problems by appointing a key person to handle the problem. For me this means that you shift responsibility of the problem to someone else. Each team member no longer needs to take individual responsibility since there is a role designated for it.

In your example, team members didn’t really need to focus on code quality since the Code Czar had that responsibility. Or when programmers struggle with their branching strategy, they start talking about appointing a change manager who would do the merging instead of raising the awareness of all team members about how branching works.

This means that I’m beginning to hear warning bells in retrospectives when those kind of improvements are being mentioned. For me, it’s a symptom of not focusing on the root cause. I think we often forget to ask the “why” and just jump into a proposed solution without really evaluating it.

Nice post!

Comment on Adventures with Auto-Generated Tests and RSpec by Glen Newton

Glen Newton — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 16:52:37 +0000

My colleague tried the following and it failed:

x=0
while x<10 do
it "should be able to solve [#{x}]" do
x += 1
end
end

This 'while' does not behave as expected….It just loops infinitely

Yet this works OK:

(0..9).each do |x|
it "should be able to solve [#{x}]" do
end
end

Any explanation?

rspec -version 2.7.1

Comment on Why Agile Teams Don't Need Process QA by Are you obsessed with testing ? » Technology Cafe

Are you obsessed with testing ? » Technology Cafe — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 14:08:41 +0000

[...] Kent Beck’s talk at Quality week She starts the presentation by quoting Kent Beck’s presentation at Quality Week way back in [...]

Comment on It’s a Book! by Erik

Erik — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:33:43 +0000

That’s pretty awesome. Thanks for the post and the link to leanpub – I think that I could assemble a few different themes of my blog posts into their own little books. It’s nice to know there’s something that makes it so easy.

I downloaded your sample as well and plan to read through it over the next week or so.

Comment on That’s a Nice Theory by Sonali

Sonali — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 17:55:10 +0000

Thanks for sharing this..This is good approach & I could very well relate to the similar discussions/resistance that comes up from team whenever we try to bring any change or improvements.

Comment on That’s a Nice Theory by B.J. Johnson

B.J. Johnson — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 16:53:54 +0000

This is a *classic* technique from just about any kind of psychological or psychiatric therapy routine. It’s actually surprising that more people don’t use it, given its exposure in popular culture because it works really well in many, many situations.

Thanks for sharing it with us so we can see how it applies in *our* environment!

Comment on That’s a Nice Theory by Bob Allen

Bob Allen — Sun, 22 Jan 2012 18:26:44 +0000

Had heard you speak of Dale’s technique before but not had the pleasure of having it so well laid out. Like so many things from Dale, it sounds intuitively obvious — once it’s explained. Thanks to the both of you.

Comment on That’s a Nice Theory by Mohinder Khosla

Mohinder Khosla — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 18:34:19 +0000

If you can find out exactly where they are coming from you can make your arguments effective by being in that scenario. You can bend people’s views if you work hard on them where your views are stronger than their. Stronger smell is always overpowering.

Comment on That’s a Nice Theory by J. B. Rainsberger

J. B. Rainsberger — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:00:13 +0000

Classic tactics that, when I remember to use them, serve me pretty well. Thank you for the reminder.

Comment on That’s a Nice Theory by YvesHanoulle

YvesHanoulle — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 15:59:28 +0000

or ask: how could be make it worse.
When people are blocked, it might help them to see that they can change the situation. If They can make it worse, there are chances they can also make it better.