tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28351195.post5577869651970358014..comments2007-10-28T09:42:57.967+01:00Pawel Brodzinskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04369257211504152485noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28351195.post-1960748872771420732007-10-28T09:42:00.000+01:002007-10-28T09:42:00.000+01:002007-10-28T09:42:00.000+01:00Unfortunately in this case being right doesn't change the situation much. Quality assurance, even when recognized as important, isn't considered so prestigious as other roles (development, project management etc). That affects both quality of people willing to take the role and quality of whole software development process, from gathering requirements to deploying solution.Pawel Brodzinskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04369257211504152485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28351195.post-79933667156196856122007-10-28T06:31:00.000+01:002007-10-28T06:31:00.000+01:002007-10-28T06:31:00.000+01:00You are absolutely right.<BR/><BR/>Another thing I have been discussing recently is the mprtance of bringing QA into the development process up front - at the requirements definition stage. Thyat way you can plan your validation and verification activitities right up front. <BR/><BR/>Everyone will know whether the requirements and software is good enough early in the project, and so fixig problems will be easier.Craighttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04913411035783086223noreply@blogger.com