- •Contents
- •Preface
- •Acknowledgments
- •About the author
- •About the cover illustration
- •Higher product quality
- •Less rework
- •Better work alignment
- •Remember
- •Deriving scope from goals
- •Specifying collaboratively
- •Illustrating using examples
- •Validating frequently
- •Evolving a documentation system
- •A practical example
- •Business goal
- •An example of a good business goal
- •Scope
- •User stories for a basic loyalty system
- •Key Examples
- •Key examples: Free delivery
- •Free delivery
- •Examples
- •Living documentation
- •Remember
- •Tests can be good documentation
- •Remember
- •How to begin changing the process
- •Focus on improving quality
- •Start with functional test automation
- •When: Testers own test automation
- •Use test-driven development as a stepping stone
- •When: Developers have a good understanding of TDD
- •How to begin changing the team culture
- •Avoid “agile” terminology
- •When: Working in an environment that’s resistant to change
- •Ensure you have management support
- •Don’t make test automation the end goal
- •Don’t focus on a tool
- •Keep one person on legacy scripts during migration
- •When: Introducing functional automation to legacy systems
- •Track who is running—and not running—automated checks
- •When: Developers are reluctant to participate
- •Global talent management team at ultimate software
- •Sky Network services
- •Dealing with sign-off and traceability
- •Get sign-off on exported living documentation
- •When: Signing off iteration by iteration
- •When: Signing off longer milestones
- •Get sign-off on “slimmed down use cases”
- •When: Regulatory sign-off requires details
- •Introduce use case realizations
- •When: All details are required for sign-off
- •Warning signs
- •Watch out for tests that change frequently
- •Watch out for boomerangs
- •Watch out for organizational misalignment
- •Watch out for just-in-case code
- •Watch out for shotgun surgery
- •Remember
- •Building the right scope
- •Understand the “why” and “who”
- •Understand where the value is coming from
- •Understand what outputs the business users expect
- •Have developers provide the “I want” part of user stories
- •When: Business users trust the development team
- •Collaborating on scope without high-level control
- •Ask how something would be useful
- •Ask for an alternative solution
- •Make sure teams deliver complete features
- •When: Large multisite projects
- •Further information
- •Remember
- •Why do we need to collaborate on specifications?
- •The most popular collaborative models
- •Try big, all-team workshops
- •Try smaller workshops (“Three Amigos”)
- •Pair-writing
- •When: Mature products
- •Have developers frequently review tests before an iteration
- •When: Analysts writing tests
- •Try informal conversations
- •When: Business stakeholders are readily available
- •Preparing for collaboration
- •Hold introductory meetings
- •When: Project has many stakeholders
- •Involve stakeholders
- •Undertake detailed preparation and review up front
- •When: Remote Stakeholders
- •Prepare only initial examples
- •Don’t hinder discussion by overpreparing
- •Choosing a collaboration model
- •Remember
- •Illustrating using examples: an example
- •Examples should be precise
- •Don’t have yes/no answers in your examples
- •Avoid using abstract classes of equivalence
- •Ask for an alternative way to check the functionality
- •When: Complex/legacy infrastructures
- •Examples should be realistic
- •Avoid making up your own data
- •When: Data-driven projects
- •Get basic examples directly from customers
- •When: Working with enterprise customers
- •Examples should be easy to understand
- •Avoid the temptation to explore every combinatorial possibility
- •Look for implied concepts
- •Illustrating nonfunctional requirements
- •Get precise performance requirements
- •When: Performance is a key feature
- •Try the QUPER model
- •When: Sliding scale requirements
- •Use a checklist for discussions
- •When: Cross-cutting concerns
- •Build a reference example
- •When: Requirements are impossible to quantify
- •Remember
- •Free delivery
- •Examples should be precise and testable
- •When: Working on a legacy system
- •Don’t get trapped in user interface details
- •When: Web projects
- •Use a descriptive title and explain the goal using a short paragraph
- •Show and keep quiet
- •Don’t overspecify examples
- •Start with basic examples; then expand through exploring
- •When: Describing rules with many parameter combinations
- •In order to: Make the test easier to understand
- •When: Dealing with complex dependencies/referential integrity
- •Apply defaults in the automation layer
- •Don’t always rely on defaults
- •When: Working with objects with many attributes
- •Remember
- •Is automation required at all?
- •Starting with automation
- •When: Working on a legacy system
- •Plan for automation upfront
- •Don’t postpone or delegate automation
- •Avoid automating existing manual test scripts
- •Gain trust with user interface tests
- •Don’t treat automation code as second-grade code
- •Describe validation processes in the automation layer
- •Don’t replicate business logic in the test automation layer
- •Automate along system boundaries
- •When: Complex integrations
- •Don’t check business logic through the user interface
- •Automate below the skin of the application
- •Automating user interfaces
- •Specify user interface functionality at a higher level of abstraction
- •When: User interface contains complex logic
- •Avoid recorded UI tests
- •Set up context in a database
- •Test data management
- •Avoid using prepopulated data
- •When: Specifying logic that’s not data driven
- •Try using prepopulated reference data
- •When: Data-driven systems
- •Pull prototypes from the database
- •When: Legacy data-driven systems
- •Remember
- •Reducing unreliability
- •When: Working on a system with bad automated test support
- •Identify unstable tests using CI test history
- •Set up a dedicated continuous validation environment
- •Employ fully automated deployment
- •Create simpler test doubles for external systems
- •When: Working with external reference data sources
- •Selectively isolate external systems
- •When: External systems participate in work
- •Try multistage validation
- •When: Large/multisite groups
- •Execute tests in transactions
- •Run quick checks for reference data
- •When: Data-driven systems
- •Wait for events, not for elapsed time
- •Make asynchronous processing optional
- •Getting feedback faster
- •Introduce business time
- •When: Working with temporal constraints
- •Break long test packs into smaller modules
- •Avoid using in-memory databases for testing
- •When: Data-driven systems
- •Separate quick and slow tests
- •When: A small number of tests take most of the time to execute
- •Keep overnight packs stable
- •When: Slow tests run only overnight
- •Create a current iteration pack
- •Parallelize test runs
- •When: You can get more than one test Environment
- •Try disabling less risky tests
- •When: Test feedback is very slow
- •Managing failing tests
- •Create a known regression failures pack
- •Automatically check which tests are turned off
- •When: Failing tests are disabled, not moved to a separate pack
- •Remember
- •Living documentation should be easy to understand
- •Look for higher-level concepts
- •Avoid using technical automation concepts in tests
- •When: Stakeholders aren’t technical
- •Living documentation should be consistent
- •When: Web projects
- •Document your building blocks
- •Living documentation should be organized for easy access
- •Organize current work by stories
- •Reorganize stories by functional areas
- •Organize along UI navigation routes
- •When: Documenting user interfaces
- •Organize along business processes
- •When: End-to-end use case traceability required
- •Listen to your living documentation
- •Remember
- •Starting to change the process
- •Optimizing the process
- •The current process
- •The result
- •Key lessons
- •Changing the process
- •The current process
- •Key lessons
- •Changing the process
- •Optimizing the process
- •Living documentation as competitive advantage
- •Key lessons
- •Changing the process
- •Improving collaboration
- •The result
- •Key lessons
- •Changing the process
- •Living documentation
- •Current process
- •Key lessons
- •Changing the process
- •Current process
- •Key lessons
- •Collaboration requires preparation
- •There are many different ways to collaborate
- •Looking at the end goal as business process documentation is a useful model
- •Long-term value comes from living documentation
- •Index
Chapter 11 Evolving a documentation system |
191 |
point of having a documentation system, because we’ll need to have people translate the old language into the new one.
It doesn’t take a lot of effort to keep the entire documentation consistent when the language evolves, and a consistent documentation will give the team much more value over the long term.
Living documentation should be organized for easy access
Living documentation systems grow quickly. As a project moves forward, the implementation team will frequently add new speciications to it; it isn’t uncommon to have hundreds of speciications in a documentation system after a few months. I interviewed several teams that had more than 50,000 checks in their living documentation systems built up over the course of several years.
For the living documentation to be useful, users have to be able to ind a description of a required function easily, which means that the whole documentation set has to be nicely organized and that individual speciications have to be easy to access.
Phil Cowans says that, for him, one of the biggest lessons about living documentation was that teams should think about high-level structure early:
We didn’t think about the high-level structure of the tests. We were just adding new tests when we needed. As a result, it’s hard to ind which tests cover which functionality. Getting the description of what the feature set of the site is and organizing the test suite along those lines (rather than just the last thing we built) would have helped. I think that’s useful in terms of developing a product and maintaining a code base that’s relatively easy to understand.
If we have to spend hours trying to piece together the big picture from hundreds of seemingly unrelated iles every time we want to understand how something works, we might as well read the programming language code. To get the most out of living documentation, information has to be easy to ind. Here are some tips on how to do that.
Organize current work by stories
Many tools for automating executable speciications allow us to group speciications into hierarchies, either as website sections and subsections or ile directories and subdirectories.
192 |
Speciication |
by |
Example |
|
|
|
|
|
If |
you |
work |
with |
a tool |
for |
automating executable speciications, it’s |
|
generally |
a |
good |
practice |
to |
group all them together for the work that’s |
|
|
currently |
in |
progress. |
|
|
Grouping speciications into hierarchies allows us to quickly execute all those speciications as a test pack, as suggested in “Create a current iteration pack” in chapter 10.
A user story will typically require us to change several functional areas. For example, a story about enhanced registration might affect a back ofice report for users and how the system does age veriication. It might also require us to implement new integrations with PayPal and Gmail. All these functions should be described by separate and focused executable speciications. We also want to have a clear deinition of when each story is done; everything related to a story should be grouped together to facilitate easy execution of all those tests.
See the suggested organization in igure 11.1: the Current Iteration branch.
Reorganize stories by functional areas
User stories are excellent as a planning tool, but they aren’t useful as a way to organize existing system functionality. Six months after PayPal integration was implemented, the fact that it initially came into the system as part of story #128 is largely irrelevant (unless you need traceability for regulatory purposes, for example). If anyone wants to understand how PayPal integration works, they’ll need to remember the exact story number so they can ind it.
Most teams reorganize their executable speciications into hierarchies by
functional |
areas |
once |
they’ve been implemented. This makes it easy ind |
an explanation |
of a |
feature by navigating through the hierarchy based on |
|
business |
functionality. |
|
In igure 11.1, this is shown in the branch under Feature Sets. Once story #128 is implemented, we should move the speciication of how PayPal integration works into payments, change back-ofice user reports into user management, and so on. Organizing a living documentation system in this way enables us to quickly ind all the existing examples related to MasterCard payments when we want to discuss a change request in that feature.
If you still want to know how some functionality was part of a particular story, there are tools that will allow you to cross-reference the same speciication from different hierarchies.