Tester commenting in a Jira ticket:
"Not testable"

Me thinking:
"Why? 🤨 Has he been attacked by a tiger or something?"

By a programmer. Tiger would be weird

@retoor no, programmers are harmless and peaceful people. 😇

Well, comment on the ticket: "Why?"

@Lensflare yes, but testers are a like flies. You can just smash them

@Oktokolo I did. But without that part about the tiger.

@retoor I don’t know… smashing people might be considered rude.

I would just answer "ok". I don't see why I have to ask you for the reason if you don't make an effort to describe the problem

“Not testable” -> “Free afternoon”

I admittedly do this way more than I should, but if the dev put zero effort into making a comprehensible ticket then they deserve a zero-effort reply.

A testable ticket describes a sequence of actions, and desired and/or undesired outcomes. Alternatively, a testable ticket can be phrased exclusively in terms of UX concepts if evoking the issue is trivial. "Promises not awaited in user controller" isn't a testable ticket. "When attempting to log in with an invalid password, user is still authenticated" is a testable ticket. "Any password works for users registered with a password" is also a testable ticket.

I'll readily assume your QA is just being lazy but this is useful context for a lot of devs out there based on the tickets I see.

@lorentz In general, the ticket should be written so that it is testable. So, before the implementation by the dev begins, it should be clear how to test it. If it’s not clear, the writer of the ticket has failed and not the dev.

@Lensflare In happier companies, devs often open tickets for bugs they discover while testing unrelated features or reading the code. These are the tickets I was talking about. Feature tickets are usually either clear enough to test or too vague to implement. Bug tickets generally reach QA first. This is also why I don't doubt that the QA here is just being lazy.