Jump to content

Talk:System integration testing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DRogers (talk | contribs) at 17:31, 2 October 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Isn't this the same as Integration Testing or are there moron bureacrats who view this as an extra step after I&T?

Can we replace the word "shakesdown" - I don't understand what it means. I'm not a software developer, but I've just come across a document on our intranet which shows Development --> SIT --> Regression so i wanted to understand what "SIT" and "Regression" means - and I can't fully understand what "shakesdown" means when refering to programming.

There is a distinct difference between Integration Testing (sometimes called Integration Testing in the small) and System Integration Testing (Integration Testing in the large). integration testing confirms that the units of a single system co-exist. Whereas System Integration testing confirms that multiple systems co-exist.

Once a system has been tested using a suite of tests there may be future releases. Regression Testing is the re-running of those previous tests to ensure that the system has not been regressed by any of changes.

Well, confirming that multiple systems co-exist sounds more like subsystem integration. But when you take two pieces and put them together, that's integration testing. When you test the whole system, that's system testing. I'm pretty sure I haven't been helpful, but I agree that we should reach a consensus on what levels of testing to describe, and what their various names are. DRogers 17:31, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]