What I like about it
- Gave a lot of information about tests
- See lots of different test ways
- Gallery: insight in different approaches
- Hands on TDD
- Nice display of different tools and approaches
- Interaction with peer dev'ers
- Liked abstract vs. bogus example
- Test smell as input/incentive to refactor
- Interactive from the start, sharing ideas with team members
- Get an impression of several different test strategies and frameworks and pros/cons
- Micro retro after session
- Discussions on test differences
- Shown possible test approaches
- TDD example at TDD based on existing tests, nice start of concepts
- Really showed the importance of test code as an opportunity to improve
- Great examples, hope you make them available
- Kata very well performed
- Very well structured, perfect use of the time. Opportunity to learn about other strategies
- See different framework approach
- Test Gallery, practical examples of test styles
To improve
- Mock and stub have a lot of different definitions. Tell yours. It seems they are different than what i understand (cfr. Martin Fowler: mocks aren't stubs article)
- Don't change it!a bit more time to present would have allowed for more depth. You guys did very well though, thanks!
- A bit more time for reading the liskov testing code
- A mention of TDD, as that's how you improved the production code
- Reserve more time or reduce the amount of info
- Include an integration test in e kata that always remain working during refactoring (and focus on it a few times)
- More practices how to write clean tests
- Add own advantages and disadvantages of each comparison chart
- Mention difference of atomic tests and functional tests
- Kata was quite complex
- A little too much Java knowledge needed
- Find helpers to guide the gallery discussions
- Reduce technical complexity of demo - it distracts from the points you want to make