> Currently having issues with this at works. Teams are pressured by their PM to release at certain time, and breaking thr pipleline and sending back bad code creates you lots of enemies from top to bottom.
I really had to think deeply to actually "get" your point because my experience differs a lot:
Recently I reimplemented some convoluted feature, which is somewhat critical for some business processes. The tester found a (surprising) bug in my implementation - I indeed did something subtly wrong. After this, a next round of testing came - it looks like another class of errors was found.
Honestly, I am very thankful for these errors that were found. The test cases that the testers provided help me to make my code much better and robust.
(just to be clear: of course, normally I write code that is mostly free of errors, but this feature is, as mentioned, quite convoluted with a complicated history behind; I already warned the testers beforehand that they better test very comprehensively).
Back to topic: Sending code back to me with a clear indication where it fails will for sure not make me an enemy, because this nearly always leads to improvement in my code, which is what I actually want (on the other hand: office politics might easily make me an enemy ... ;-) ).
The reason you don't make enemies with QA is because you have been able to express your earnestness. If you instead, however, sent bad code on purpose, or carelessness, because of a deadline. Then you would make enemies.
I really had to think deeply to actually "get" your point because my experience differs a lot:
Recently I reimplemented some convoluted feature, which is somewhat critical for some business processes. The tester found a (surprising) bug in my implementation - I indeed did something subtly wrong. After this, a next round of testing came - it looks like another class of errors was found.
Honestly, I am very thankful for these errors that were found. The test cases that the testers provided help me to make my code much better and robust.
(just to be clear: of course, normally I write code that is mostly free of errors, but this feature is, as mentioned, quite convoluted with a complicated history behind; I already warned the testers beforehand that they better test very comprehensively).
Back to topic: Sending code back to me with a clear indication where it fails will for sure not make me an enemy, because this nearly always leads to improvement in my code, which is what I actually want (on the other hand: office politics might easily make me an enemy ... ;-) ).