home > plop > 2006 > Papers > Notes > 27-notes.php

PLoP 2006 Shepherded Papers

Notes on Paper 27:

I suggest Functional Testing: A Pattern to Follow and the Smells to Avoid to be workshopped at PLoP.

The authors have plenty of experience in the subject and I can see a lot of potential in this paper and further writings based on it.

Jason Che-han Yip

___________________________________

I agree with Jason Yip that there is a lot of potential in the paper, but am not convinced that it should be workshopped yet.
It really depends on the responsiveness of the authors. In the shepherding process they have followed a lot of the more detailed
suggestions from Jason, but unfortunately not his more fundamental advice like going from smells to patterns.

The way the paper comes through today it is more an argument to do functional testing than a pattern. I can not really find a solution
unless the solution is to do functional testing, which does not really tell me much...

In the initial mail from the shepherd:
> This entire paper is describing the pattern "Functional Testing"?
> There seems to be something at a more detailed scale trying to come
> out of the paper. For example, try changing the Solutions to your
> smells to Patterns. Then you have Patterns for Automated Functional
> Testing. I've done something similar with the Daily Stand-up pattern
> (originally described as a single pattern in Scrum) and wrote a paper
> on patterns within Daily Stand-ups. This is a direction you might
> want to consider.

I agree fully with this. The paper should have been reworked completely to be a set of patterns for functional testing.

If we have enough capacity, it could be an idea to have the paper workshopped, because I think it would give more
feedback to the authors supporting the suggestions from Jason. It does need major rework to become a good
patterns paper.

Cheers,
Lise