Large projects automatically generate their share of humorous events and mishaps. The above statement was put into a dialogue box in  a program by a developer for the simple reason to mess with the QA & Testing group as a joke. For additional effect she added a randomizer that sometimes continued and sometimes quit on any action. Developers generally optimistically see the glass half full, QA always pessimistically see the glass half empty and architects of course simply know that you need a glass ½ the size for things to be perfect.

The result from QA, 9 logged and documented bugs.

1. Priority 1 bug – system did not “continue” as required

2. Priority 1 bug – system did not “quit” as required

3. Priority 3 bug – User Text confusing

4. Priority 3 bug – Test case ambiguous

5. Priority 1 bug – Any other key to quit works, any key to continue fails sometimes.

6. Priority 2 Tech QA bug – Developer did not seed RAND{} function , will not produce true random output.

7. Priority 2 bug – Function not documented in functional specification – Change Request required

8. Priority 3 bug – “Any key” “Another Key” function inconsistent with other program exit patterns.

9. Priority 3 Tech QA bug – code does not use standard IO library.

Just no sense of humor …

I was really looking for #1 – “Ah you’re just messing with us” but it never was logged. The learning from this humorous event (or attempt at it), is that above all the team needs to keep perspective. If something is silly, call it that because it just might be a joke or if not, still worth laughing at….