“Crowdsourced Quality Assurance & Code Coverage: No Longer Mutually Exclusive?”

  by Nick Medeiros


Crowdsourced QA is on the rise – and for good reason. Companies offering the service boast faster times to market, reduced testing costs, higher product quality, increased peace of mind, and better confidence during release. Disadvantages to this testing approach exist, too, like the lack of the testers’ code coverage information. Does this mean that black-box testing and code coverage are mutually exclusive? No.

We’ll explore four scenarios where crowdsourced QA is beneficial for a development team and where code coverage analysis coupled to it enhances the product quality. These scenarios are:

[1 – ] manual testers who are spread geographically
[2 – ] outsourced testing to a firm that uses a dedicated framework for, e.g., GUI testing
[3 – ] Beta-version testing coupled with profiling to determine which sections of the source code are most utilized
[4 – ] Security-conscious teams who are not permitted to share source code to the “crowd.”

We’ll examine each scenario using a commercial code coverage toolchain, and, through practical Qt application examples, we’ll demo application instrumentation, merging the crowd’s coverage reports, profiling, and more.

About the speaker

Nick Mederios TQCFormer computational engineer turned marketing professional, Nick is currently serving the role of Product Marketing Manager, QA Tools, over at The Qt Company. When he’s not writing for Qt, he enjoys reading poetry, drinking a maximum of three cups of coffee per day, and, when inspiration strikes, running.