Skip to main content

Wikimedia Foundation hiring QA staff

The Wikimedia Foundation currently has two open positions for QA staff.  One is for a QA Engineer and the other for a Volunteer QA Coordinator

I want to point out what a unique opportunity this is.

Before I was hired at WMF four months ago as "QA Lead", there had never been anyone working on the Wikipedias and related projects whose only focus was testing and quality.  There was no UI test automation, there was no program of community testing.   Actually, there still isn't.  That's where these new staff come in.  No exaggeration:  this is an opportunity to create from scratch the quality and testing practices for one of the great achievements in human history.  But WMF only has about 100 staff, and only about half of those are technical.  At the moment, there are about 50 regular contributors to WMF software (and millions and millions of users!), so this QA staff will be outnumbered and outgunned.  So we need help, both from automation and from a community of people interested in testing. 

WMF has two priorities this year for QA and testing:  one is to implement some browser-level test automation.  The other is to involve both the testing community and the Wikipedia community in more testing activities. 

As QA Lead, I figured it was my job to lay some groundwork for these activities.  So I did a lot of research on the current state of browser automation (I'd not been following recent developments there for some time) and built a demonstration and example of what I think the best available browser test "stack" should be.   (Note: there is some bad code in there right now, for a purpose)  I think Ruby is the way to go for this, and this is my justification for that.  I am really looking forward to working with our new QA Engineer to expand these tests, bring in community contributions, hook it up to Jenkins, run it against our brand new test environment, etc. etc.  My little spike is only an example, and I look forward to having my mind changed about how it will ultimately be of use. 

The other thing I've done is to begin having "test events" where WMF invites outside groups to help test some aspect of the Wikipedia software.  On May 5 2012 we teamed up with Weekend Testing to validate the new frequent deployment scheme when we began updating all the Wikipedia software every two weeks.  On June 9 we'll be teaming up with Openhatch.org for a "shakedown cruise" of the new Wikipedia Article Feedback system that will be rolled out to all of Wikipedia in just a few weeks.   I'm looking forward to working with the new Volunteer QA Coordinator to expand community testing both in partnership with other organizations and within the Wikipedia community itself. 

As for me, to the extent that I am a "Lead", I tend to lead from behind.  I'll be working with new and evolving WMF projects to bring testing and quality work where it can be the most valuable.  I'll be working with the test automation communities to improve development practices through testing.  I'll be looking for cool stuff out in the world for Wikipedia to make use of.  It's a brilliant future. 

Comments

Abhi9 said…
Thanks for share details :)
Deitrich said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
RNDTECHNOLOGIES said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
malini ecorp said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
TestWithUs said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
TestWithUs said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
TestWithUs said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
TestWithUs said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
smith rose said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Popular posts from this blog

Reviewing "Context Driven Approach to Automation in Testing"

I recently had occasion to read the "Context Driven Approach to Automation in Testing". As a professional software tester with extensive experience in test automation at the user interface (both UI and API) for the last decade or more for organizations such as Thoughtworks, Wikipedia, Salesforce, and others, I found it a nostalgic mixture of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt), propaganda, ignorance and obfuscation. 

It was weirdly nostalgic for me: take away the obfuscatory modern propaganda terminology and it could be an artifact directly out of the test automation landscape circa 1998 when vendors, in the absence of any competition, foisted broken tools like WinRunner and SilkTest on gullible customers, when Open Source was exotic, when the World Wide Web was novel. Times have changed since 1998, but the CDT approach to test automation has not changed with it. I'd like to point out the deficiencies in this document as a warning to people who might be tempted to take it se…

Watir is What You Use Instead When Local Conditions Make Automated Browser Testing Otherwise Difficult.

I spent last weekend in Toronto talking to Titus Fortner, Jeff "Cheezy" Morgan, Bret Pettichord, and a number of other experts involved with the Watir project. There are a few things you should know:

The primary audience and target user group for Watir is people who use programming languages other than Ruby, and also people who do little or no programming at all. Let's say that again:

The most important audience for Watir is not Ruby programmers 
Let's talk about "local conditions":

it may be that the language in which you work does not support Selenium
I have been involved with Watir since the very beginning, but I started using modern Watir with the Wikimedia Foundation to test Wikipedia software. The main language of Wikipedia is PHP, in which Selenium is not fully supported, and in which automated testing in general is difficult. Watir/Ruby was a great choice to do browser testing.  At the time we started the project, there were no selenium bindings for …

Open letter to the Association for Software Testing

To the Association for Software Testing:

Considering the discussion in the software testing community with regard to my blog post "Test is a Ghetto", I ask the Board of the AST  to release a statement regarding the relationship of the AST with Keith Klain and Per Scholas, particularly in regard to the lawsuit for fraud filed by Doran Jones (PDF download link) .

The AST has a Code of Ethics  and I also ask the AST Board to release a public statement on whether the AST would consider creating an Ethics Committee similar to, or as a part of the recently created Committee on Standards and Professional Practices.

The yearly election for the Board of the AST happens in just a few weeks, and I hope that the candidates for the Board and the voting members of the Association for Software Testing will consider these requests with the gravity they deserve.