Oh, not again… How many times do I have to go through a basic process of application release and acceptance? Yet, here it comes again. Lack of understanding of software testing basics, misunderstanding of the roles severity and priority, bizarre views of the acceptance process. It seems like déjà vu all over again ;) And so far I’ve seen it with it with every small offshore s/w development shop that uses waterfall or similar type of process. So with no more ado let me just state these ABCs of the application release and acceptance…
To accept or not to accept the software should not be a philosophical question. As a matter of fact it should be as subjective as reasonably possible. To stop feelings and egos getting in our way we need to start with setting up a process of release and acceptance. For example, something as simple as that:
Release & Acceptance Process
- Offshore team delivers the software change package (SCP) to my secure FTP site. The SCP must include properly named and versioned build, configuration files, metadata, resources, and release notes.
- My release team takes the SCP and installs it on User Acceptance Testing environment. If installation is successful release team notifies offshore team. Project Manager and QA/UAT team. If install fails the release team notifies offshore team and Project Manager.
- QA/UAT team performs testing according to test plan / strategy that is based on the nature of changes included in SCP. If the system passes Acceptance Criteria QA/UAT team notifies offshore team, PM, Release Team, and Product Manager and clears the SCP to be promoted to staging/production. If the system fails to passe Acceptance Criteria QA/UAT team notifies offshore team, PM, and requests a replacement SCP.