Skip to main content

vodQA-2 A grand success

ThoughtWorks, pune recently played host to the vodQA-2 event, a technical conference which brings testers from various organizations under one roof. The turnout for the event was way better than vodQA-1. The topics too were great and so was the quality of speakers. This time the event had lengthy talks, lightening talks and also a talk on TWIST, a ThoughtWorks product which is a testing tool.

This was what was covered during vodQA-2

Full Length talks
Topics
Organization
Deepak Gole & Saager Mhatre
Automated acceptance testing for iPhone
Sapna Solutions
Parul Mody & Vijay Khatke
Cloud Testing
BMC Software
Ashwini Malthankar
Effective use of Continuous integration by QA
ThoughtWorks
Vijay and Supriya
Test your service not your UI
ThoughtWorks

Lightning Talks
Topics
Organization
Satish Agrawal
Leadership and Innovation in a commoditized industry
Persistent Systems
Anay Nayak
Fluent Interfaces and Matches
ThoughtWorks

Name
Topic
Organization
Fish bowl topic
Transition from Manual to Automation Testing??
All speakers and attendees
Parallel Track: Ananthapadmanabhan R
Twist : Evolving test suites over test cases
ThoughtWorks

There was a well conducted fishbowl session too which was discussed in detail with inputs from a lot of participants.

I was overwhelmed looking at the number of people who attended the event. There were easily about 100 people who were keenly taking down notes during the presentation and also flocking the presenters after their talk got over.

Overall i was very impressed with the way the event was organised. Kudos to the organising committee of vodQA.

Looking forward to vodQA3 now :)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Build quality in early and often

One of the most important aspects of building good software is to encourage the concept of build, measure and learn. For companies to be able to innovate and be quick to market they must encourage a good engineering culture that sets up teams for success. In an ideal world, you should deliver to production daily. However, if you deliver software fast, but it is full of bugs, your product has a lower chance of succeeding. As an agile tester, one of your focus points has to be to speed up the feedback loop while maintaining good quality. Over the years I have laid across a few good practices that make teams build the product right and also build the right product. Engage Test Engineers as early as possible in the development cycle Test Engineers are often treated as the last stand against finding problems before release, yet like all software activity; their focus is affected by the information available to them. In order to better understand the risk associated with changes an
Post a Comment
Read more

BDD is over-rated

Over the past few years, I have tried to justify the use of a BDD (Behavioral Driven Development)  framework to express my tests, but not once have been able to say BDD has helped me address a  problem which writing tests the non BDD way would not have addressed. I do understand the value BDD brings to the table, but in most projects that I have implemented BDD on, we have tried to provide a solution (BDD) to a problem that does not exist. Let me try and explain. Lets look at the key benefits of expressing tests the BDD way (There could be more) Collaboration between Business and Development Ubiquitous Domain Language Focus on the behavior of the application Now, more often than not unless your business is co-located with the team, collaboration is not the easiest. The value BDD brings here, is the business validating our understanding by reading our tests expressed in the Given When Then format (BDD) and providing feedback, as BDD expresses the behavior of the system in a l
1 comment
Read more

Can projects do without Business Analysts?

My  last 2 gigs were a bit different to the usual ones from a team composition point of view. The bit that was different was that there weren't any Business Analysts on the team. My initial concerns were who would gather requirements? Who would analyse stories? Who would negotiate scope with the business? Who would be involved in Scope Management? Who would be our proxy customer? The above questions got me concerned, but it wasn't as bad as i thought it to be. The customer was co-located with the team and we had easy access to validate our understanding on business rules, scope, sign-offs etc. Our team composed of an IM, Devs and Testers. The IM was managing scope with the customer and getting the priorities. The team would then sit with the business to understand what the requirements were and we would create Epics and then further break them down into smaller chunks of workable stories. A thing to note here is that all roles would put their BA hat on and identify gaps if
Post a Comment
Read more