I didn't missed any point, I asked how can you tell your software is ready with zero testing? How do you make sure you have reliable software? Are your customers your alpha testers, that's a really bad methodology imo, but hey if they're paying cheap I guess is on them anyways.
Most agencies I've worked in have had their own CMS that they've manually tested, which is bad I know, but not my choice. It's reliable because most of the time it's been in production for a while any issues that do crop up were fixed.
Alot of software needs tests, but generally the customers agencies get want a cheap solution. Tests simply aren't budgeted.
I must add, I agree tests should be there, but it's not up to me, or the guy next to me, it's up to the client if they want to pay for the additional time, and 99% of the time that isn't the case. That's what you get when it's cheap, you get a bare minimum to pass as a website.
Bad practises are rife, my problem that I pointed out with this article is that not everything is unit or feature tested, sometimes it's just not feasable because the end client doesn't want to pay and are working on a budget, adding tests to apps costs time and money, which they don't have alot of the time.
You're right, it is on them, I can put an argument for them easily enough, but it's not my money to spend and my boss wouldn't sign off on it because it costs him money.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Big company = money to spend. Missing my point entirely about testing when working in digital agencies
I didn't missed any point, I asked how can you tell your software is ready with zero testing? How do you make sure you have reliable software? Are your customers your alpha testers, that's a really bad methodology imo, but hey if they're paying cheap I guess is on them anyways.
Most agencies I've worked in have had their own CMS that they've manually tested, which is bad I know, but not my choice. It's reliable because most of the time it's been in production for a while any issues that do crop up were fixed.
Alot of software needs tests, but generally the customers agencies get want a cheap solution. Tests simply aren't budgeted.
I must add, I agree tests should be there, but it's not up to me, or the guy next to me, it's up to the client if they want to pay for the additional time, and 99% of the time that isn't the case. That's what you get when it's cheap, you get a bare minimum to pass as a website.
Bad practises are rife, my problem that I pointed out with this article is that not everything is unit or feature tested, sometimes it's just not feasable because the end client doesn't want to pay and are working on a budget, adding tests to apps costs time and money, which they don't have alot of the time.
You're right, it is on them, I can put an argument for them easily enough, but it's not my money to spend and my boss wouldn't sign off on it because it costs him money.