> Can anyone cite a credible development philosophy that believes testing can replace bad developers or bad process?
None. But that's hardly the issue, I too often have seen people championing heavy testing as a way to deliver quality software, because it's the agile way. The problem is not with the philosophies but the way people interpret them or misinterpret them.
The sarcastic quote in the article sums my feeling on the behaviour I've seen in a lot of shops: "I find that weeks of coding and testing can save me hours of planning.".
I've had the hardest time convincing people to spend a week thinking about our approach and solution, but adding months of development time to expend test coverage and suddenly everyone thinks it's worth it (And usually with nothing to back that up).
None. But that's hardly the issue, I too often have seen people championing heavy testing as a way to deliver quality software, because it's the agile way. The problem is not with the philosophies but the way people interpret them or misinterpret them.
The sarcastic quote in the article sums my feeling on the behaviour I've seen in a lot of shops: "I find that weeks of coding and testing can save me hours of planning.".
I've had the hardest time convincing people to spend a week thinking about our approach and solution, but adding months of development time to expend test coverage and suddenly everyone thinks it's worth it (And usually with nothing to back that up).