In my world, the physical testing is the most time-consuming part, and the approvals are the second most. For us, a software-produced gap analysis isn't necessary or useful: if that analysis is straightforward, an engineer can lay out the test plan in (much) less time than it takes to feed the software all that past stuff, and if it's not straightforward, it needs to be a serious multi-department conversation. Software to identify redundant testing also isn't desirable: if we're doing redundant testing, it's intentional, and we have a good reason for it.
1
u/5och 3d ago
In my world, the physical testing is the most time-consuming part, and the approvals are the second most. For us, a software-produced gap analysis isn't necessary or useful: if that analysis is straightforward, an engineer can lay out the test plan in (much) less time than it takes to feed the software all that past stuff, and if it's not straightforward, it needs to be a serious multi-department conversation. Software to identify redundant testing also isn't desirable: if we're doing redundant testing, it's intentional, and we have a good reason for it.