TiP is misunderstood – perhaps DDQ is Better
I spent a long time talking to folks about the merits of a conscientious Testing in Production (TiP) strategy. But I knew TiP had a bad rap. I even shared the story of how some would mischaracterize it as a common and costly technical malpractice
While evangelizing TiP, I and my Microsoft colleagues would happily post this picture wherever we could
Yet I knew the original poster was not so enthused with TiP. Comments on TiP were supposing this was not a conscientious and risk-mitigated strategy, but instead devs behaving badly:
Then blame all issues on QA -_-
That’s our motto here. Doesn’t work to well in practice, actually.
Now I have returned to Amazon after spending 6 years at Microsoft. From the following it looks like I have some education to do.
On the other hand, who can argue with Data-Driven Quality (DDQ). (Except maybe a HiPPO). DDQ is also more expansive than TiP, leveraging all data streams whether from production, customer research, or pre-release engineering. So TiP was fun, but DDQ is the future.
Comments
Pingback from Seth Eliot's Blog » Blog Archive » Dog bone approach to testing
Time May 22, 2015 at 2:52 pm
[…] (yeah, I went back to using TiP instead of DDQ…) […]
Pingback from Testing Bits — 1/11/15 – 1/17/15 | Testing Curator Blog
Time January 19, 2015 at 9:29 am
[…] TiP is misunderstood — perhaps DDQ is Better – Seth Eliot – https://setheliot.com/blog/2015/01/12/tip-is-misunderstood-ddq-is-better/ […]