Talk:Mutation testing
![]() | This page is substantially duplicated by an external website, http://www.mutationtest.net/twiki/bin/view/Resources/MutationAnalysis. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of that source. See below for more information. |
Rename the article
Wouldn´t be "Mutation testing" a better name for this article? Andreas Kaufmann 19:18, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- I renamed the article from 'Mutation analysys' to 'Mutation testing', since it is a more common term for this testing method. Andreas Kaufmann 13:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with this: mutation analysis is different to mutation testing. Mutation testing is generating automatic testcases. Mutation analysis is defined in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.115.3.170 (talk) 15:17, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
- The term Mutation testing is much more ofen used as a synonym to Mutation analysis and not in a narrow sense "generating automatic testcases". Just as the term software testing is used to specify a sub-filed in software engineering and not just as the process of creating tests for software. Andreas Kaufmann (talk) 09:13, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Who watches the watchmen?
"Verifying the tests" is an instance of the deeper philosophical problem named "Who watches the watchmen?". So I added an interdisciplinary link to Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? in the text of the article. --Antonielly (talk) 18:13, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Copyright Infringement/Introduction Copied
The introduction paragraph seems to be more or less copied from here: http://www.mutationtest.net/twiki/bin/view/Resources/MutationAnalysis —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.232.250.50 (talk) 13:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for bringing up your concerns with this. Wikipedia takes copyright infringement seriously, and we appreciate being alerted to potential problems. In this case, it seems infringement would be reversed. The external site is dated 3 June 2007, with authorship credited to Giuseppe Di Guglielmo. The text in our article predates that. An editor with that username did contribute a link to the article in May, 2007, here, but there's no reason to presume he had authorization to release the text of the article to that site without permission of previous contributors. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:57, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Reference to original article
I would have expected that the original article by Lipton would be referenced.