How does Agile testing differ from traditional Waterfall QA methods?

All answers to this question.

The key is "Developer-QA collaboration." Don't wait for a formal hand-off; test on the dev's local machine if you have to.

   Answered 2024-07-16 by Betty Nelson

• Right, Betty. "Pair Testing" is a great Agile technique. It builds empathy between roles and finds bugs much faster than the traditional "toss it over the wall" method.

     Commented 2024-07-17 by Kevin Garcia

Does this mean the QA person needs to be involved in the daily stand-ups and sprint grooming sessions?

   Answered 2024-07-17 by Joseph Baker

• Joseph, absolutely. If QA isn't at the grooming, they can't point out "testability" issues. A feature might be easy to code but impossible to test without a major database mock. Catching that early in the grooming session is what keeps the sprint on track and prevents those last-minute disasters on the final Friday.

     Commented 2024-07-19 by Charles Gonzalez

In Waterfall, testing is a phase; in Agile, it’s a continuous activity. To avoid the "squeeze," you must automate as you go. In 2024, we started writing "Acceptance Tests" as soon as the story was pulled into the sprint. Developers use these as their target. By the time the code is ready, the test script is already waiting. We also broke stories down into smaller chunks. If a story is too big to test in two days, it’s too big for the sprint. This is the only way to hit that "Done-Done" goal consistently.

   Answered 2024-11-10 by Nancy King