Book Review: Agile Testing by John Watkins
Note: I've had to really reign myself in on this review so I don't savage the book. A lot of people have contributed to this book, and I assume they all worked hard. But I did not enjoy this book. I feel sad that I can not show this book any affection. Instead I recommend you read Lisa Crispin and Janet Gregory's "Agile Testing" instead.
I don't think the author aimed this book at the 'Miracle QA staff' who 'invent' their test process 'on the fly each morning' following 'some consistent approach to how he or she performs their testing'. No. It appears to aimed at 'the rest of us', who 'need to rely on documented best practices to provide guidance on the who, the what, and the when of testing, and to provide reusable templates for the things we create, use, or deliver as part of our testing activities'.
OK, so page 2 and I feel alienated.
By page 4 I learn that I can head off to http://www.cup.agiletemplates.com and see the templates for an agile test script, an agile test results record form, and an agile test summary form - and what makes them agile? I couldn't tell. I wouldn't use them in an Agile process. But I will warn you - don't go to the site URL listed otherwise you'll see links to tattoos and tattoo design. The first of many proof reading errors? Or an 'agile' joke to see how fast you can run from the site? (the real link to the agile templates (not found in the book) http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521726870&ss=res)
Chapter 2 - overview of testing.
Chapter 3 - "Agile Development and Testing" (my italics), short descriptions of some ‘Agile’ development 'methods', sadly, despite the name of the chapter I found practically no information about testing here.
So on to Part 2 where I read 20 case studies. Unfortunately the title of the book "Agile Testing" seems more than a little misleading; "Agile development as described by some testing professionals" seems more accurate.
Some of these did not seem like case studies though, a few opinion pieces about 'Agile' - some of them read more like theory than the war stories of battle hardened Agile practitioners. Unfortunately because no contributor refers to any other contribution they very often go over the same ground and draw the same conclusions.
Sadly, these case studies would have offered some value to me, had the contributors really explored the testing process in use, with fewer descriptions of the ‘process’ and more descriptions of the decisions and justifications for putting that process in place, the lessons learned... and then... what happened after the lessons’ application. A missed opportunity, I feel.
The case studies all follow a standard format and some of the individual contributors sense of humour shine through, but I found no real explanation of the thought process or evaluations behind the decisions. And most phrase the lessons learned as "these are the generic lessons you should learn" rather than "these are the lessons we learned and here is why"
I didn't gain much from this section.
Then John Watkins summarises the case studies for us to generate an ‘Agile development described’ chapter.
Followed by John Watkin's "Agile Process" which reads like a summary of the preceding chapter. And note - not a 'test' process - it covers the whole development process.
This seemed like a very generic 'Agile' book and not a book about Agile Testing. Anyone interested in Agile Testing should read "Agile Testing" by Janet Gregory and Lisa Crispin.
Related Reading
- "Agile Testing" by Janet Gregory and Lisa Crispin
- An excerpt on the Cambridge site (including the cup.agiletemplates.com joke link)
- The real 'Agile' templates
I didn’t find this strangely anonymous review very useful. My overall impression is of a reviewer with an inflated oppinion of themselves (who freely claims to be a Miracle QA person) who doesn’t believe mere mortal testers need any guidance. The list of contributors to this book reads like a who’s who of testing - they are Miracle QA’ers, and people the reviewer might well gain some benefit from studying their humility and experience (although I am sure the reviewer is far too Great a QA Miracle to learn from these lesser-beings).
Thanks for the comment Dai.
I assume you haven’t read Watkins’ book.
It seems as though I have written a reverse psychology review that will cause you to rush out and buy it, instead of the far far better Lisa and Janet book.
When you do, read Watkins’ book you will see that the “Miracle QA” quote is Watkins’ and he does not apply it to anyone in the book. He applies it to people, and I try to make this clear in the review but must have failed, who invent their own test approach as the circumstances change based on a consistent understanding of how they test, again using Watkins’ words. Since I see the good testers I know actually doing this, and yes I do think I do this too, I consider this normal, not miraculous.
Do you really consider this description of a tester miraculous?
Just to clarify, I would never describe myself as a QA person. I describe myself as a tester.
I re-read the review and I’m pretty sure I did not describe any contributor to the book as a “lesser-being”. I know some of the contributors and, those I know I also respect and have discussed the book perfectly pleasantly with them.
Best of luck reading the book. Although I think “mere mortal testers” will gain much more from reading Lisa and Janet’s book - I know I did - and that was the main point of the review, the rest was to provide some justification for that statement.
I guess my review wasn’t written well enough to communicate these points fully, so thank you for the feedback.
I appreciate that my writing style may come across with an absence of humility, and I don’t mind that. So even if the tone of this comment doesn’t sound like it, I really do appreciate you writing the comment. All comments help me look back at what I’ve written and ask myself “was I too hard?”, “do I still stand by what I have written?”.
And I still agree with my reading of the review. I will live with the fact that I haven’t communicated as well as I had hoped to, so I’ll try to make my closing statement clear.
I gained much more benefit from studying Lisa and Janet’s book. I think everyone else will too.
Thanks,
Alan Richardson (Compendium Developments) and http://www.eviltester.com