PROJECT ID: XXX-XXX-XXX

SPRINT: November X, 20XX-December X,

20XX

TEST RESULT REPORT (Situation 1)

Related Artifacts:
1. A document that is related to this report
2. A document that is relates to this report
3. A document that is relates to this report
1. Introduction

This document provides an overview of the testing efforts conducted during

the previous sprint to ensure product quality. It includes details such as
the application overview, allocated testing resources (the testing team
and their roles), testing methodologies and configurations used, the
testing schedule, and conclusions drawn from the actual outcomes of the
sprint.

2. Application Overview

The primary goal of this project is to develop the “XXXX XXXX” web
 application, which enables users to share their preferences in music,
literature, and movies online.

The “XXXX XXXX” application comprises three main modules: Audio,

Films, and Library. Registered users can add information about music,
films, and books to their profiles and rate their experiences with these
items. To connect with others who share similar tastes, users can apply
search filters to explore and find matching profiles within the application.

3. Testing Scope and

Configurations Used Build No.:

2.1.1.
Build Description:
New Features: Implementation of a new module ("Library").
Bug Fixes: Resolution of minor and trivial defects identified during the
previous sprint.
Scope of Testing:
In-Scope: Functional testing for the following modules:

Audio: Both Back-end and Front-end, based on User Stories.

Films: Both Back-end and Front-end, based on User Stories.
Library: Both Back-end and Front-end, based on User Stories.
Out-of-Scope:

Performance and security testing were excluded from this sprint.

Features Not Tested:

The chat widget, integrated as a third-party component, was

excluded from verification of connectivity during this sprint.
Testing Process:
The testing process included the creation, review, and maintenance of
artifacts, build installation, smoke testing, critical path testing, extended
testing, regression testing, defect hunting, defect reporting, and
associated communication and troubleshooting. Each QA dedicated 40
hours to this effort.

The application was tested on the following configurations:

- Windows 7 x64 6.1.7601.17514 , Mozilla 102.0.1
- Windows 11 version 21H2 – 10.0.19044.1766, Mozilla 102.0.1
- Windows 11 version 21H2 – 10.0.19044.1766, Edge 103.0.1264.62
- Windows 11 version 21H2 – 10.0.19044.1766, Chrome 80.0.3987.106
- Linux Ubuntu 22.04 , Chrome 80.0.3987.106
- Linux Ubuntu 22.04, Edge 103.0.1264.62
- Linux Ubuntu 22.04, Mozilla 102.0.1

All the tests were executed manually in accordance with the test cases
written by the
team members in advance (see ‘Related Artifacts’).

4. Testing Team

QA Role Responsibilities
Anastasia Pashkevich QA Lead Test plan creation,
([email protected]) definition and further
optimization of the test
strategy (approaches,
methods, tools etc.) to be
employed and quality
criteria, standardization
of processes and
approaches, estimation of
testing effort and testing
progress in general,
identification of delivery
issues related to testing
and resource needs,
assignment of work to
the testing team
members and keeping
track of their
performance, provision of
TRRs
Abdullokh Tolibjonov QA Development
([email protected]) Engineer
and maintenance of test
cases, functional and GUI
testing, defect reporting,
peer review with regard
to testing artifacts,
and reporting on testing
status, regression testing

5. Schedule

This schedule spans the period from November 7, 2022, to December 2,

2022, and outlines the key milestones in the testing process for the
current sprint.
 # Activity Start point End point Created by
1. Environment set-up Nov 7, 2022 Nov 9, 2022 Test Team
Build installation and
2. Nov 10, 2022 Nov 11, 2022 Test Team
configuration
3. Execution of smoke testing Nov 14, 2022 Nov 16, 2022 Test Team
Execution of critical path
4. Nov 16, 2022 Nov 21, 2022 Test Team
testing
Execution of extended
5. Nov 21, 2022 Nov 23, 2022 Test Team
testing
Execution of regression
6. Nov 23, 2022 Dec 1, 2022 Test Team
testing
7. TRR creation Dec 2, 2022 Dec 2, 2022 Test Lead

6. Build Verification

The test results obtained during the sprint from November 7, 2022-
December 2, 2022 presented in the tables and figures below:

Table 1. Testing Results Summary

Audio Films Library
Blocker 0 1 0
Critical 0 3 1
Major 2 1 2
Minor 4 2 0
Trivial 3 0 6
No. of test cases planned 55 57 53
No. of test cases executed 55 56 53
No. of passed tests 46 51 43
(average)
No. of failed tests (average) 9 6 10
No. of blocked tests 0 1 0
(average)
Requirements coverage, % 100 100 85
Please note that the requirements coverage for the ‘Library’ module will be
increased in
the next sprint.
 'Audio' Module Testing Results
60

55 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
50 9 9 8 8 9 9 9

45
46 46 47 47 46 46 46
40
Win 7, Firefox Linux, Firefox Win 10, Linux, Chrome Linux, Edge Win 10, Firefox Win 10, Edge
Chrome

Passed tests Failed tests Blocked tests

Fig 1.1 ‘Audio’ Module: Testing Results

'Audio' Module: Test Pass Rate

16% 0%

84%

Passed tests Failed tests Blocked tests

Fig 1.2 ‘Audio’ Module: Test Pass Rate

'Audio' Module: Defect Distribution by Severity

22%
33%

45%

Major Minor Trivial

Fig 1.3 Defect Distribution by Severity in the ‘Audio’ Module

 'Films' Module Testing Results
60
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
55 6 6 6 6 6
8 8
50

45 51 51 51 51 49 51 49
40
Win 7, Firefox Linux, Firefox Win 10, Linux, Chrome Linux, Edge Win 10, Firefox Win 10, Edge
Chrome

Passed tests Failed tests Blocked tests

Fig 2.1. ‘Films’ Module: Testing Results

'Films' Module: Test Pass Rate

10%2%

88%

Passed tests Failed tests Blocked tests

Fig 2.2 ‘Films’ Module: Test Pass Rate

'Films' Module: Defect Distribution by Severity

14%
29%

14% 43%

Blocker Critical Major Minor

Fig 2.3 Defect Distribution by Severity in the ‘Films’ Module

 'Library' Module Testing Results
60
50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 10 10 12 10 10 10
40
30
20 43 43 43 41 43 43 43
10
0
Win 7, Firefox Linux, Firefox Win 10, Linux, Chrome Linux, Edge Win 10, Firefox Win 10, Edge
Chrome

Passed tests Failed tests Blocked tests

Fig 3.1 ‘Library’ Module: Testing Results

'Library' Module: Test Pass Rate

19% 0%

81%

Passed tests Failed tests Blocked tests

Fig 3.2 ‘Library’ Module: Test Pass Rate

'Library' Module: Defect Distribution by Severity

11%

22%

67%

Critical Major Trivial

Fig 3.3 Defect Distribution by Severity in the ‘Library’ Module

Since the exit criteria set a certain TC pass rate (at least 95%), test
execution was suspended in order to fix defects affecting the key
functionality of the application. The average pass rate is 84,3% before
fixes.

Figure 4.1 summarizes information on defect closure performed (please

note that this diagram envisages the defects detected in this sprint):

DEFECT SPRINT STATISTICS BY

STATUSES
9 9

7
6
5
4
3 3
2
1 1
0

Audio Films Library

Fig 4.1 Defect Sprint Statistics

To gain an understanding of the current fix rate in general (including defects

coming from the previous iterations and fixed in this sprint) and of the way the
outstanding defects are distributed, see Table 2:

Table 2. Outstanding Defects and Total Amount Of Defects Closed In This

Sprint
Blocke Critica Major Minor Trivia
r l l
Closed 1 4 5 5 5
Open 0 0 0 8 6
TPR before 81-88%
fixes
TPR after fixes 90-95%

*TPR – test pass rate

Therefore, we may conclude that there are no outstanding critical defects

and blockers at the end of the sprint. With the defects closed, the test
pass rate makes 90-95% on average before the release (‘Audio’: 95%,
‘Films’: 90%, ‘Library’: 92%).
For more information about defects dynamics over the last five sprints, see
the figure and the table below:

Defect Dynamics Over 5 Sprints

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5

TD at the start Found Closed Reopened Deferred TD at the end

*TD – technical debt

Fig 4.2 Defect Sprint Dynamics Over 5 Sprints

Table 3. Defect Sprint Dynamics Over 5 Sprints In Numbers

TD at TD at
Found Closed Reopened Deferred
the the
start end
Sprint No. 1 0 43 27 3 13 16
Sprint No. 2 16 32 29 5 14 19
Sprint No. 3 19 28 34 7 6 13
Sprint No. 4 13 16 20 2 7 9
Sprint No. 5 9 25 20 2 12 14

It arises out of the data presented above that the scope of the current
technical debt and the amount of defects found in the latest build shows a
slight increase that might be attributed to the implementation of the new
module (‘Library’).

7. Conclusions And Recommendations

Based on the testing results obtained, the exit criteria established (see
Test Plan) and the latest test pass rate, we may conclude that the current
build is of high quality and works as expected and intended with minor
defects in its current state.

We deduce the following:

a) The total amount of defects revealed during the sprint is 25, of which:
 - 1 blocker;
- 4 critical defects;
- 5 major defects;
- 6 minor defects;
- 9 trivial defects.
20 defects were closed (15 defects from Sprint No. 5 and 5 defects from
previous sprints). At the moment, the Defect Backlog contains 14 minor
and trivial defects to be fixed in the future sprints. In the next sprints, we
plan to give special consideration to the ‘Films’ module, since our team has
discovered issues with greater severity in this module.
b) As it appears from Fig 4.2, the current defect closure rate decreased in
the last two sprint. Moreover, the TD scope went upwards from 9 to 14. At
the moment, we assume that these temporary tendencies may result from
the new functionality implemented and the fact that more time was
devoted to development rather than fixes. We see these trends turn other
way in the upcoming sprint due to the measures to be taken (inclusion of more
time into effort estimations, refinement of the existing functionality rather than
development).
c) It’s advisable to re-evaluate the necessity to execute performance tests
due to an increasing users’ influx and take this effort into consideration
while estimating future sprints.
d)There are still security-related requirements to be defined clearly: at the
moment, there is no clear distinction of privileges and roles. We need BA
assistance to continue working on log-in mechanisms.
e) With an increasing regression suite, it’s desirable to re-consider test
automation instead of performing all the regression tests manually.

Situation 2 ( test status report)

I was working on regression testing.

I executed 127 test cases across 3 different environments. During testing,
17 bugs were identified: 1 critical, 2 major, and 14 minor.
Additionally, I retested 5 bugs: 1 major bug was reopened, and 4 minor
bugs were closed.

No further blockers at the moment, and the testing is progressing as

planned.
Situation 3 (Feature quality report)
Test results for Personal Profile feature:

Total tests executed: 120

Passed: 102
Failed: 13
Blocked: 5
Bugs found:

Critical:
• Profile data is not saving after editing when the internet connection is
unstable.
Major:
• Password reset email is not being sent for some users.
• Profile picture upload fails for large image files (>5MB).
Minor:
• Input fields do not align properly on smaller devices.
• Tooltip text for the phone number field is missing.
Summary:
The feature is stable overall but not release-ready due to unresolved
critical and major issues. Additional testing and fixes are required before
the Friday release.

Situation 4 (Test status report)

I was working on verifying a critical bug fix.
During testing, I noticed that the fix has impacted different areas of the
application. I decided to check all affected areas to ensure stability.

So far, I have tested 3 areas, with 2 passing and 1 minor issue detected
(non-blocking).
Testing is still in progress, and I will continue checking the remaining
areas ASAP.

I’ll provide an update once testing is complete.