Software quality assurance test case bug lifecycle l.jpg
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 11

Software Quality Assurance TEST CASE / BUG LIFECYCLE PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 140 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Software Quality Assurance TEST CASE / BUG LIFECYCLE. Seminar: Oana FEIDI Quality Manager – Continental Automotive. Traceability matrix. A traceability matrix is created by associating requirements with the work products that satisfy them.

Download Presentation

Software Quality Assurance TEST CASE / BUG LIFECYCLE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Software quality assurance test case bug lifecycle l.jpg

Software Quality AssuranceTEST CASE / BUG LIFECYCLE

Seminar: Oana FEIDI

Quality Manager – Continental Automotive


Traceability matrix l.jpg

Traceability matrix

  • A traceability matrix is created by associating requirements with the work products that satisfy them.

  • Tests are associated with the requirements on which they are based and the product tested to meet the requirement.

  • Traceability requires unique identifiers for each requirement and product.

  • Traceability ensures completeness, that all lower level requirements come from higher level requirements, and that all higher level requirements are allocated to lower level requirements. Traceability is also used to manage change and provides the basis for test planning.


Example l.jpg

Example

V-cycle traceability

Simple traceability


Exercise l.jpg

Exercise

Exercise: Create the traceability matrix and test cases for the following specification:

C1: up to 500 EUR value of goods there is no rebate

C2: From 500 up to 1000 EUR there is a 2.5% rebate

C3: Over 1000, up to 5000 EUR there is a 5.0% rebate

C4: Above 5000 EUR, a 8.5% rebate is applied


Traceability in standards s p i c e l.jpg

Traceability in standards – S.P.I.C.E.

Traceability requirements for code and module testing


Traceability in standards s p i c e6 l.jpg

Traceability in standards – S.P.I.C.E.

traceability is a requirement stated inside SW development models (CMMI, S.P.I.C.E.)


Slide7 l.jpg

Bi-directional traceability in S.P.I.C.E.


Bug lifecycle l.jpg

Bug lifecycle

  • States1. New 2. Open 3. Assign 4. Test 5. Verified 6. Deferred 7. Reopened 8. Duplicate 9. Rejected and 10. Closed


Bug lifecycle states i l.jpg

Bug lifecycle – states I

  • New:

    • When the bug is posted for the first time, its state will be “NEW”. This means that the bug is not yet approved.

  • Open:

    • After a tester has posted a bug, the lead of the tester approves that the bug is genuine and he changes the state as “OPEN”.

  • Assign:

    • Once the lead changes the state as “OPEN”, he assigns the bug to corresponding developer or developer team. The state of the bug now is changed to “ASSIGN”.

  • Test:

    • Once the developer fixes the bug, he has to assign the bug to the testing team for next round of testing. Before he releases the software with bug fixed, he changes the state of bug to “TEST”. It specifies that the bug has been fixed and is released to testing team.

  • Deferred:

    • The bug, changed to deferred state means the bug is expected to be fixed in next releases. The reasons for changing the bug to this state have many factors. Some of them are priority of the bug may be low, lack of time for the release or the bug may not have major effect on the software.


  • Bug lifecycle states ii l.jpg

    Bug lifecycle – states II

    • Rejected:

      • If the developer feels that the bug is not genuine, he rejects the bug. Then the state of the bug is changed to “REJECTED”.

  • Duplicate:

    • If the bug is repeated twice or the two bugs mention the same concept of the bug, then one bug status is changed to “DUPLICATE”.

  • Verified:

    • Once the bug is fixed and the status is changed to “TEST”, the tester tests the bug. If the bug is not present in the software, he approves that the bug is fixed and changes the status to “VERIFIED”.

  • Reopened:

    • If the bug still exists even after the bug is fixed by the developer, the tester changes the status to “REOPENED”. The bug traverses the life cycle once again.

  • Closed:

    • Once the bug is fixed, it is tested by the tester. If the tester feels that the bug no longer exists in the software, he changes the status of the bug to “CLOSED”. This state means that the bug is fixed, tested and approved.


  • Severity of bug l.jpg

    Severity of Bug

    • Critical / Show Stopper

      • An item that prevents further testing of the product or function under test can be classified as Critical Bug. No workaround is possible for such bugs. Examples of this include a missing menu option or security permission required to access a function under test. .

  • Major / High

    • A defect that does not function as expected/designed or cause other functionality to fail to meet requirements can be classified as Major Bug. The workaround can be provided for such bugs. Examples of this include inaccurate calculations; the wrong field being updated, etc. .

  • Average / Medium

    • The defects which do not conform to standards and conventions can be classified as Medium Bugs. Easy workarounds exists to achieve functionality objectives. Examples include matching visual and text links which lead to different end points. .

  • Minor / Low

    • Cosmetic defects which does not affect the functionality of the system can be classified as Minor Bugs.


  • Login