Skip to main content

I don't report bugs



I don't report bugs. Bug is such a loaded word that people understand very differently, that instead of using it and explaining what I mean by it I rather just use other words. Like observations, thoughts, surprises, ideas, alternatives, or something similar. (And no I don't use fault, defect, or error either).

Bug has also quite a negative connotation. "Reporting a bug" is kind of like telling someone that they've been served. And as we are actually giving away the gift of information, why wrap it in such a nasty package?

And maybe more importantly it is very likely that whatever you might have to say is wrong. If not plain wrong, then at least incomplete. So I like to approach the kind of situations with the assumption that I am probably wrong. Cutting off anything that might sound arrogant makes stuff quite a lot easier. Especially after you realise later on that you have been wrong.

I leave plenty of observations unreported. I don't want to waste my or my colleagues time on stuff I believe will not create any actions. If I see no risk, I see no/little value, I just drop it. Someone might think this is irresponsible, I consider it professional.

I don't write reports. Writing a great report takes a lot of time, and it still very easily might get understood differently. So I always rather go talk to someone, or ask someone to come and take a look. Demoing a behaviour to someone is faster, enables better understanding, and also with other people you usually can find the possible root causes faster.

Still, Sometimes due to different reasons I still may write something. If I do I:
1. Keep it short. People will lose focus or not even read long texts
2. Tell what the observation is. So what happened, and why I think it was interesting. E.g. this happened, although I would've expected that.
3. Tell why. Why I think it is interesting. But briefly.
4. Give a bit details. ID, log snippet, link. Just enough to understand how the observation could be seen.

But will not write this into a backlog or defect tracking system. It's such a sad thing to see those beautiful bug reports getting buried into defect tracking systems or backlogs, forever to be forgotten. So rather into a chat, where someone might even comment on it.

If I can wrap all this into a failing automated test, I might. But then I often feel like I am spending a bit too long time on my own, missing the communication. Plus if I'd go this far why not just go and fix the problem myself or by pairing up with someone.

Can you imagine, I used to lecture about bug reporting, I used ti arrange competitions on who has the best bug reports. And now I won't even write them anymore.



And I love it.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Testers doing test automation - is that the most important thing for you to do right now?

I've been thinking quite a lot about tester's moving to do test automation.  Lately beause of these three things: 1.  European testing conference , a great testing conference I attended couple of weeks ago. It is very cool due to many things; the way the speakers get compensated, the focus on the conferring side of conferences making it very easy for people to discuss stuff, the way the talks are chosen, and because there are also a lot of developers joining. So anyway when I was talking with several of the attendees, it was a bit strange how it was easier for me to talk about the product development as a whole with the developers, where as with the testers it more naturally moved into talk of automation and tools. Also on the open space, I think the majority of the topics pitched was automation or tool related. And quite little on the process or on the customer facing side of product development.  2. In my company there are a lot of different products and...
3 comments
Read more

Testing drunk

(My first blog writing ever.) I've been thinking a long time that it's funny how many bugs I find by accident. Try to do something, make a mistake and boom - a bug is found.  Making the mistakes intentionally doesn't quite work - that's why they are called accidents I guess.. So I've thought of ways to make myself more prone to accidents, coming up with an apparent one; testing drunk. TUI (testing under the influence). So this I gotta try. More to come on that later.
3 comments
Read more

Six reasons why testers should do code reviews

I have had quite a lot of discussions about code reviews. Quite many also with testers, by which I have understood that many do not do those. I will not start arguing here on whether code reviews are good/important or not. But I will list a few things why I think testers would benefit of doing them. 1. Code is the only documentation that is up to date . If you really want to know how something really functions, you want to be able to see and read the code. 2. Knowing more about the thing done enables you to do better testing . You can spot things that you should definitely test, and things that you probably don't need to test that much. Like extra things added by coder, usage&modifications of existing functions, data types, etc. And to arguments thinking that one loses their "independence" as a tester by knowing too much, I would worry a lot less about that than about testing stuff that you have no idea on how it has been built. 3. Improve logging . I obse...
2 comments
Read more