I’m like a test unitarian. Unit tests? Great. Integration tests? Awesome. End to end tests? If you’re into that kind of thing, go for it. Coverage of lines of code doesn’t matter. Coverage of critical business functions does. I think TDD can be a cult, but writing software that way for a little bit is a good training exercise.

I’m a senior engineer at a small startup. We need to move fast, ship new stuff fast, and get things moving. We’ve got CICD running mocked unit tests, integration tests, and end to end tests, with patterns and tooling for each.

I have support from the CTO in getting more testing in, and I’m able to use testing to cover bugs and regressions, and there’s solid testing on a few critical user path features. However, I get resistance from the team on getting enough testing to prevent regressions going forward.

The resistance is usually along lines like:

  • You shouldn’t have to refactor to test something
  • We shouldn’t use mocks, only integration testing works.
    • Repeat for test types N and M
  • We can’t test yet, we’re going to make changes soon.

How can I convince the team that the tools available to them will help, and will improve their productivity and cut down time having to firefight?

  • sip@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    yea but the counter was that they need to move fast.

    In the beginning, tests slow you down, but in time, the amount of bugs tests catch and the confidence in refactoring adds up to way more saved time.

    • Skyzyx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Right. “Move fast” means that it’s going to get progressively worse, and 2 years from now it will all collapse under the weight of its bugs.

      Think of tech debt as cancer, and tests as chemotherapy. It might suck for a while, but it can also make you much better.