|
|
|
|
|
|
by locknitpicker
79 days ago
|
|
|
> Good QA people know how to find regression and bugs _that you didn’t think about_ which is the whole reason why it shouldn’t be under “engineering” and that it should exist. I think the core of the issue is the weasel word "Good QA" instead of just "QA". You're underlining the importance of having someone in a team who has good product understanding and has good ownership skills. How many QAs fit that description? Not many, unfortunately. Some FANGs outright eliminated the role and replaced it with a mix of product owners and team ownership, and some QAs are just doing their 9-to-5 job going through their manual test scripts to verify it something meets a definition of done. What happens when you can have a LLM agent doing the same instantly as a step in a random CICD pipeline? |
|
|