Does wanting a dedicated tester signal to my boss that my coding skill is bad?
Not to sound mean, but quality assurance in my view is a responsibility; not a role.
There is nothing stopping you from writing automated tests to ensure quality, in fact that's what you should be doing anyway as a software professional.
If I owned a small business I would 100% expect my developers to take ownership of quality.
Now if the business does not give you the time to do these things, it's their problem if the quality of the product suffers.
So still more inclined to have developers do testing instead of having dedicated staff. The issue here is not so much quality nor time allocation. But is to discuss the best strategy to enable our managers. You shouldn’t think of your managers as enemies.
So still more inclined to have developers do testing instead of having dedicated staff.
I believe testing/QA is a collective responsibility yes. In larger organisations you may have need for specialised people who dedicate more time to it. In a small business I wouldn't hire a "tester".
Doesn’t that depend on the definition of small business? In some jurisdictions, small business is less than 15 employees, in others less than 50 employees. I wouldn’t go so far as to rule out dedicated testers here.
But in any case, the question then becomes at what point is a dedicated person more valuable, if at all?
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.
Not to sound mean, but quality assurance in my view is a responsibility; not a role.
There is nothing stopping you from writing automated tests to ensure quality, in fact that's what you should be doing anyway as a software professional.
If I owned a small business I would 100% expect my developers to take ownership of quality.
Now if the business does not give you the time to do these things, it's their problem if the quality of the product suffers.
So still more inclined to have developers do testing instead of having dedicated staff. The issue here is not so much quality nor time allocation. But is to discuss the best strategy to enable our managers. You shouldn’t think of your managers as enemies.
I believe testing/QA is a collective responsibility yes. In larger organisations you may have need for specialised people who dedicate more time to it. In a small business I wouldn't hire a "tester".
I didn't mean to give that impression!
Doesn’t that depend on the definition of small business? In some jurisdictions, small business is less than 15 employees, in others less than 50 employees. I wouldn’t go so far as to rule out dedicated testers here.
But in any case, the question then becomes at what point is a dedicated person more valuable, if at all?