There are a few reasons why I’m worried about this standard:
- Closed standards seem to be anti-thesis of the modern software age where open-source standards, software and collaboration are the keys to success. Plus it makes the organization seem a bit shady.
- It’s anti-agility. Burdensome test processes, documentation, etc. over the skills and experience of the people applying them directly reject the philosophy of the Agile Manifesto.
- There are legitimate disagreements within the software testing community on fundamental things such as terminology, let alone basic processes. In the last 15+ years as an industry we’ve started to develop a path towards understanding these disagreements but I highly doubt this “standard” has solved or even attempted to understand and settle those differences.
James Bach says “[a] standard for testing would have to reflect the values and practices of the world community of testers. Yet, the concerns of the Context-Driven School of thought, which has been in development for at least 15 years have been ignored and our values shredded by this so-called standard and the process used to create it. They have done this by excluding us.” (ref 1) (emphasis is my own)
- As Cem Kaner said “Standards are political documents and sometimes legal ones. The existence of a standard makes it easier for a court (or a regulator) to rule that the standard-approved approach is the professionally correct one, and the non-approved approaches (or the ones that conflict with the approved one) are professionally incorrect and therefore improper. The imposition of a standard that imposes practices and views on a community that would not otherwise agree to them, is a political power play.” (ref 2) (emphasis is my own)
In the end I’m not sure how much effect signing this petition will have on it’s outcome, impact or acceptance but I am concerned enough to make a stance. I would rather say I protested it than accept it in silence.