Paul Gerrard's blog
I was in Nieuwegein, Holland last week giving my ERP Lessons Learned Talk as part of the EuroSTAR - Testnet mini-event. After the presentation, I was talking to people afterwards. The conversation came around to test environments, and how many you need.
At last week's Test Management Forum, Susan Windsor introduced a lively session on estimation – from the top down. All good stuff. But during the discussion, I was reminded of a funny story (well I thought it was funny at the time).
The raw materials of real engineering: steel, concrete, water, air, soil, electomagnetic waves, electricity, obey the laws of physics.
Software of course, does not.
Engineering is primarily about meeting trivial functional requirements and complex technical requirements using materials that obey the laws of physics.
I was asked recently whether the definitions - Functional and Non-Functional - are useful.
My conclusion was - at the least, they aren't helpful. At worst debilitating. There's probably half a dozen other themes in the initial statement but I'll stick to this one.
This post is based on the first section of a paper I'm writing to accompany my Eurostar Keynote talk in December.
Motivation for this Talk
This talk is based on my experience of doing two things. Coaching rowers and coaching testers – two things close to my heart. There are some universal rules about coaching and I wanted to explore some of the commonalities between coaching athletes (rowers are athletes) and testers.