# Software Testing A software engineering discipline for evaluating software against requirements and identifying defects before deployment. This is one page of public article previews, not the complete archive. Follow Next page to continue. Summaries are not the original full articles. ## Honoring #IconsOfQuality: Huib Schoots DevFeed: [Honoring #IconsOfQuality: Huib Schoots]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Rajrupa Roychowdhury Published: 2026-09-16T08:21:48Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [BrowserStack Blog]() Topics: [Testing](), [Software Testing](), [Artificial Intelligence](), [Software Engineering]() Tags: [ai](), [icons-of-quality](), [quality](), [software-testing](), [thought-leadership]() ### AI overview An interview with Huib Schoots explores software testing as a thinking activity centered on questioning assumptions, exploring risks, and helping teams make better decisions. Schoots also discusses using AI to support testing while preserving human judgment. ### Source excerpt To celebrate the relentless passion and invaluable contributions of leaders in software quality, BrowserStack is proud to honour Icons of Quality. ## Honoring #IconsOfQuality: Gaurav Singh DevFeed: [Honoring #IconsOfQuality: Gaurav Singh]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Rajrupa Roychowdhury Published: 2026-09-15T11:29:38Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [BrowserStack Blog]() Topics: [Software Testing](), [Test automation](), [Microsoft](), [Microsoft Teams](), [CI/CD](), [Meta](), [Artificial Intelligence]() Tags: [ai-agents](), [ci-cd](), [icons-of-quality](), [microsoft](), [microsoft-teams](), [quality](), [software-testing](), [test-automation]() ### AI overview BrowserStack profiles Gaurav Singh, a Senior Software Engineer at Microsoft, as an Icon of Quality. The article highlights his work on scalable engineering systems, testing infrastructure, CI/CD pipelines, developer productivity, mentorship, and the role of determinism and feedback loops in automated testing. ### Source excerpt To celebrate the relentless passion and invaluable contributions of leaders in software quality, BrowserStack is proud to honour Icons of Quality. ## Honoring #IconsOfQuality: Jesper Ottosen DevFeed: [Honoring #IconsOfQuality: Jesper Ottosen]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Rajrupa Roychowdhury Published: 2026-09-14T12:02:58Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [BrowserStack Blog]() Topics: [Software Testing](), [Software Engineering](), [developer tooling]() Tags: [blog](), [engineering](), [eu](), [icons-of-quality](), [software-testing]() ### AI overview BrowserStack profiles Jesper Ottosen as an Icon of Quality and discusses his work in test strategy, software quality, GRC engineering, regulatory compliance, and security. The article highlights his views on beginning testing strategies with clear purpose, aligning testing with delivery and stakeholder concerns, and developing future quality professionals. ### Source excerpt To celebrate the relentless passion and invaluable contributions of leaders in software quality, BrowserStack is proud to honour Icons of Quality. ## Honoring #IconsOfQuality: Richard Bradshaw DevFeed: [Honoring #IconsOfQuality: Richard Bradshaw]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Rajrupa Roychowdhury Published: 2026-09-09T11:44:44Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [BrowserStack Blog]() Topics: [Testing](), [Software Testing](), [Software Engineering](), [Artificial Intelligence](), [Automation]() Tags: [ai](), [ai-agents](), [automation](), [engineering](), [evals](), [icons-of-quality](), [qa](), [quality-engineering](), [software-engineering](), [software-testing](), [telemetry](), [testing]() ### AI overview BrowserStack profiles Richard Bradshaw, a software testing and quality engineering leader, and discusses his views on AI agents, human-centric automation, and evaluating probabilistic AI systems. ### Source excerpt To celebrate the relentless passion and invaluable contributions of leaders in software quality, BrowserStack is proud to honour Icons of Quality. ## Using netlab in Software Testing with Dinesh Dutt DevFeed: [Using netlab in Software Testing with Dinesh Dutt]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2026-08-28T06:26:00Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [ipSpace.net blog]() Topics: [Software Testing](), [networking](), [software-development](), [Ansible](), [Vagrant]() Tags: [ansible](), [development](), [netlab](), [network](), [networking](), [podcast](), [software](), [software-development](), [software-gone-wild](), [software-testing](), [testing]() ### AI overview This article introduces Episode 208 of Software Gone Wild, a conversation about using netlab to test network management software. It discusses how netlab helps Stardust Systems test new SuzieQ features, along with related history involving Vagrant and Ansible. ### Source excerpt I know a few software development companies use netlab to test their network management software (and contribute back to netlab - thanks a million!), and I always wanted to chat about that. As I have known Dinesh Dutt for ages, it wasn't hard to decide who to invite to have that chat with ;) As it turns out, it's dangerous to put Dinesh1 and me in the same (virtual) room - we were all over the place, from the ancient history of Vagrant in networking labs to the recent Ansible woes, but we did manage to cover how netlab helps Stardust Systems test new SuzieQ features. Read more ... ## Using AI for agentic software testing DevFeed: [Using AI for agentic software testing]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Jeff Morhous Published: 2026-07-30T14:26:39Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [The AI-Augmented Engineer]() Topics: [Testing](), [Software Testing](), [Artificial Intelligence](), [developer tooling]() Tags: [agentic](), [ai](), [ai-tools](), [software-testing](), [testing]() ### AI overview The article argues that as AI makes code generation faster, testing and quality engineering become more important for safely shipping software. It discusses common testing compromises and cites a 2026 report stating that 60% of organizations regularly ship untested code to production. ### Source excerpt Testing is a place where dedicated AI tools make an insane difference ## From Pass/Fail to Confidence Levels: The Evolution of QA in the AI Era DevFeed: [From Pass/Fail to Confidence Levels: The Evolution of QA in the AI Era]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Gayatri Panganti Published: 2026-07-22T06:16:20Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [Helpshift]() Topics: [Testing](), [Software Testing](), [AI Agent](), [Large Language Model]() Tags: [agents](), [ai](), [ai-agents](), [ai-ready-qa-mindset](), [beyond-traditional-qa](), [bug](), [configuration](), [consistency](), [qa](), [qa-beyond-pass-or-fail](), [software-testing](), [testing](), [trust]() ### AI overview This article explains how quality assurance for AI features differs from traditional deterministic software testing. It argues that testing should assess behavior, consistency, safety, policy adherence, and trust across varied prompts and contexts rather than relying only on binary pass/fail results. ### Source excerpt For decades, software testing followed a familiar pattern. A feature either worked or it didn't. A button click resulted in an expected outcome. An API returned a predefined response. A workflow either passed or failed. Large Language Models (LLMs) have changed that equation. 🤖 Modern AI agents don't simply execute the instructions- they interpret, reason, generate and adapt. The same prompt may produce different responses across executions while still being technically correct. As a result, Quality Assurance is evolving from validating deterministic outputs to evaluating confidence in AI features and behaviour. That question is no longer : >> Did the feature work? It has become: >> Can we trust how the AI behaves across a wide range of real world situations? Traditional QA Vs AI QA Traditional applications are deterministic. If the same input is provided ten times, the output should be identical ten times. -- -- -- Input -> Business Logic -> Expected Output -- -- -- AI systems behave differently. Same Prompt -> Correct Answer -> Different (but still correct) Answer -> Hallucination -> Policy Violation -> Escalation -> Rejection/Resolution Every one of these outcomes may be observed from the same feature depending upon the context, prompt wording, conversation history, model behaviour or configuration. Accordingly AI bug can be classified as, Prompt Issue / Model Behaviour / Product Bug / Configuration Issue This does not mean the AI feature is broken, it means the testing strategy must evolve. -- -- -- Pass/Fail Is No Longer Enough Traditional QA measures correctness. AI QA measures behaviour. Instead of asking whether a test passed, QA teams increasingly evaluate questions such as, Was the response helpful? Was it aligned with the expected response? Did it follow the configured instructions? Was sensitive information protected? Was the response safe and comply with organisation policies? Did it performed the configured actions correctly? Was the escalation triggered only w ## BrowserStack wins 2026 Top Rated Award from TrustRadius DevFeed: [BrowserStack wins 2026 Top Rated Award from TrustRadius]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: BrowserStack Team Published: 2026-06-18T08:37:16Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [BrowserStack Blog]() Topics: [Testing](), [Software Testing](), [browser](), [Automation](), [Accessibility]() Tags: [2026](), [accessibility](), [automation](), [automation-testing](), [browser](), [company](), [customers](), [reviews](), [software-testing](), [testing]() ### AI overview BrowserStack announces that it received the 2026 TrustRadius Top Rated Award, its fourth consecutive win since 2023. The article cites a trScore of 8.4 out of 10 and more than 260 verified reviews, with recognition across accessibility testing, automation testing, cross-browser testing, functional testing, and test management. ### Source excerpt We are so excited to share that authentic, verified feedback from our customers has earned us a 2026 Top Rated Award by TrustRadius! ## Testing and AI Workshop by James Bach of Rapid Software Testing - Notes DevFeed: [Testing and AI Workshop by James Bach of Rapid Software Testing - Notes]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: T.J. Maher (noreply@blogger.com) Published: 2026-06-12T18:10:14Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [T.J. Maher]() Topics: [Testing](), [Software Testing](), [Artificial Intelligence](), [ChatGPT]() Tags: [agentic](), [ai](), [chatgpt](), [james-bach](), [notes](), [rapid-software-testing](), [rst](), [software-testing](), [testing]() ### AI overview A personal account of James Bach's Testing and AI Workshop, describing its AI-assisted testing demonstrations, hands-on exercise, and review session. The author enjoyed the class but had limited time to complete the practical exercise because of family responsibilities. ### Source excerpt Last week, I saw that there was a new half day workshop by one of the creators of Rapid Software Testing, James Bach, Testing and AI Workshop, and that they were offering a 50% discount for anyone who was unemployed, so I just had to attend. Visit James Bach's Satisfice.com Download Page to download PDFs on topics such as Responsible Work (May 2026), AI Writing Policy (April 2026), Heuristic Test Strategy Model (December 2024), Rapid Software Testing Explored Class Appendices (December 2024) Why Testers? (Oct 2024) and ChatGPT Sucks at Being a Testing Expert (August 2023) YouTube Channel: Rapid Software Testing Check out James Bach's Classes at https://www.satisfice.com/classes (50% discount if unemployed) The next Testing and AI Workshop will be July 6, 2026 "In each session, the instructors will first perform a live 'testopsy.' This is a demonstration of AI-assisted testing (using both assistive and agentic modes of AI) on a real product, accompanied by an analysis and explanation of what happened during the demo. During this part of the workshop, you may ask questions or offer critique. "Next the instructors will challenge you to perform a similar process or solve a similar problem with the help of AI. You will have two hours. You will be able to work alone or in groups, as you like. "Finally, the instructors will review and critique your work, if you choose to share it. At the end of the event, you will get to keep the videos". I really enjoyed the class! It involved an hour-and-a-half webinar, where James Bach walks people though how he uses AI, a few hours where you can work on your own project for the course, then another hour-and-a-half webinar where course attendees could review what they came up with to analyze a site. My only problem with the course was that my rambunctious seven year old was home sick, and I wasn't able to dedicate a few hours to come up with how to use AI to test a website, since I was busy making lunch and chatting with my kiddo. What ## A new era for software testing DevFeed: [A new era for software testing]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2026-06-07T09:46:06Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [Antirez]() Topics: [Testing](), [Software Testing](), [Integration testing](), [AI Agent](), [Large Language Model]() Tags: [ai-agent](), [integration-testing](), [llms](), [markdown](), [software-testing](), [testing]() ### AI overview The article argues that large language models can extend conventional software QA and testing by having an AI agent perform manual checks described in a Markdown file. It contrasts locally scoped tests, integration tests, and manual QA passes, and gives DwarfStar, an inference engine for open-weight LLMs, as an example. ### Source excerpt Automatic programming dramatically speeds up writing software in certain use cases and in the right hands. In my experience the output does not reach the structural quality and economy of complexity of the best hand-written software. However, not all the software is stellar, and my feeling is that automatic programming surpasses most of the times (and if well managed) the quality of decently developed hand-written code. Yet, there is a tradeoff between quality and time, in the case of writing new software with AI. This tradeoff in certain projects I developed can be brutal, that is, completing projects that may take many months in a few weeks. However, there are domains where LLMs simply open new strictly more powerful ways to automate processes, without any compromise on quality. One of those domains is software QA and testing. Traditionally software is tested using test suites that are composed of locally-scoped tests and integration tests (think of Redis: one thing is testing if SET foo 10 will be matched by GET foo => 10, another thing is testing if replication works in this case). And then by QA passes that are usually manually executed, and that can capture holes in the runnable test suite. It is a known fact that covering all the lines of the code does not mean covering all the possible states. Moreover integration testing is structurally hard: there are a number of timing issues, setups, and certain quality outputs that can only be visually inspected and not automatically checked that leave a lot of testing opportunities not really exploited because of time or logistic constraints. LLMs offer a new way to do QA on top of the existing testing methodologies. The idea is to create a markdown file where an AI agent is asked to work as a QA engineer, performing a number of manual testings on the new release. For instance, in the case of DwarfStar (an inference engine for open weights LLMs) I use the following approach. In the markdown file, the agent is asked to ## New Position Unlocked: Senior SDET at AAA Life Insurance, starting Monday, June 15th, 2026! DevFeed: [New Position Unlocked: Senior SDET at AAA Life Insurance, starting Monday, June 15th, 2026!]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: T.J. Maher (noreply@blogger.com) Published: 2026-06-04T02:16:39Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [T.J. Maher]() Topics: [Software Testing](), [Mobile]() Tags: [2026](), [aaa-life](), [automation](), [community](), [leadership](), [linkedin](), [mobile](), [programming](), [software-testing](), [sqgne](), [testing]() ### AI overview The author announces starting a Senior SDET position at AAA Life Insurance Company on June 15, 2026, after an extended job search. The article also announces the author's nomination as a volunteer director of the Software Quality Group of New England and describes recent community activities, including a talk on building a mobile automation test framework. ### Source excerpt I have two announcements: I've accepted a job offer as a Senior SDET role at AAA Life Insurance Company, and will be starting Monday, June 15th! And I have been nominated to be one of the volunteer Directors on the leadership board of the Software Quality Group of New England. Man, the job market is brutal! It took me four months of job searching in 2025 to find SELF Id when MassMutual outsourced its technology department. And it took me four months of near constant job searching in 2026 to find AAA Life when I was caught up in the second round of SELF's layoffs in the end of January. After throwing countless resumes into the void, submitting post after post on LinkedIn, experimenting with countless automation frameworks and programming projects on tjmaher.com, and spamming my entire LinkedIn Network (sorry about that!), and everyone I have worked with in the past twenty years as a software tester, desperately looking for job leads, it was a staffing firm working for AAA Life who found me. Thank you, Refactor Talent! Rewriting my LinkedIn Resume to make sure that I was using proper keywords in my "About" section of my LinkedIn Profile seems to have done the trick! I'd also like to announce that I found another awesome software testing community to be a part of: The Software Quality Group of New England, a local non-profit meeting monthly in Burlington, MA. Come join us! And we are always looking for in-person speakers. I've been missing being part of a software testing community! I was Meetup Organizer for the now defunct Ministry of Testing - Boston group from 2016 to 2024, loving every minute I was trying to find speakers, sponsors and hosts. I made so many great connections during my tenure. It's sad the Meetup group was shut down by the Ministry of Testing UK a few months ago, but I am glad to be part of a new software testing group! In the past month as a new member of the SQGNE, I have: * Given a talk to the group on building a mobile automation test framework ## Breakpoint 2026: Highlights from Day 2 DevFeed: [Breakpoint 2026: Highlights from Day 2]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Shweta Chhillar Published: 2026-06-01T11:42:52Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [BrowserStack Blog]() Topics: [Artificial Intelligence](), [Testing](), [Software Testing](), [Software Engineering](), [API]() Tags: [2026](), [ai](), [api-testing](), [breakpoint](), [generative-ai](), [llms](), [qa](), [testing]() ### AI overview This article highlights Day 2 of Breakpoint 2026, focusing on evidence-based discussions of AI-native quality engineering, enterprise AI testing, the future of test engineering, changing QA practices, and human factors in evolving testing roles. Sessions address enterprise AI security and scalability, generative AI, self-healing systems, LLM limitations, and organizational approaches to sustaining quality while increasing delivery speed. ### Source excerpt Explore all sessions, speaker talks, and announcements from Breakpoint 2026 Day 2, covering AI in software testing, the future of test engineering, human-AI collaboration in QA, API testing with AI code assistants, accessibility, and sustaining quality in AI-driven systems. ## Breakpoint 2026: Highlights from Day 1 DevFeed: [Breakpoint 2026: Highlights from Day 1]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Shweta Chhillar Published: 2026-06-01T09:25:38Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [BrowserStack Blog]() Topics: [Software Testing](), [Testing](), [Artificial Intelligence](), [Test automation](), [Automation](), [API](), [Security](), [prompt injection](), [code productivity](), [Accessibility]() Tags: [2026](), [ai](), [automation](), [breakpoint](), [developer-productivity](), [prompt-injection](), [qa](), [security](), [software-testing](), [testing]() ### AI overview Breakpoint 2026 Day 1 examines how AI-native quality engineering can reduce the traditional trade-off between testing speed and quality. It covers AI-assisted test execution, Copilot-driven automation, intent-based workflows, agentic QA systems, and frameworks for testing AI agents across reasoning, actions, and end-to-end outcomes. ### Source excerpt Explore the biggest announcements, expert insights, and conversations from Breakpoint 2026 Day 1, covering AI in software testing, test automation, developer productivity, accessibility testing, and the future of intelligent testing workflows. ## BrowserStack Newsletter April 2026 DevFeed: [BrowserStack Newsletter April 2026]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Devanshi Jain Published: 2026-05-26T10:50:54Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [BrowserStack Blog]() Topics: [Testing](), [Software Testing](), [Automation](), [Accessibility](), [Flutter](), [React Native](), [WebView](), [Selenium](), [Figma]() Tags: [accessibility](), [ai](), [browser](), [event](), [features](), [flutter](), [newsletter](), [product](), [react-native](), [report](), [software-testing]() ### AI overview BrowserStack's April 2026 newsletter covers Breakpoint 2026 content, a report on AI in software testing, and product updates across App Automate, Percy, Website Scanner, and Accessibility. Updates include expanded framework support, improved CI debugging and visual comparison workflows, broader authentication testing, WCAG 2.2 AA coverage, partial-page scanning, and Safari support. ### Source excerpt Read what's new at BrowserStack in April 2026 - New launches, product features, and more! ## Breakpoint 2026 Speaker Spotlight: Andrew Knight DevFeed: [Breakpoint 2026 Speaker Spotlight: Andrew Knight]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Shweta Chhillar Published: 2026-05-08T10:14:54Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [BrowserStack Blog]() Topics: [Testing](), [Software Testing](), [Artificial Intelligence](), [Behavior-driven development](), [Automation](), [Selenium](), [Playwright](), [MCP Server](), [Open Source]() Tags: [2026](), [ai](), [automation](), [breakpoint](), [breakpoint-spotlight](), [browser](), [enterprise](), [mcp](), [mcp-server](), [open-source](), [qa](), [quality-engineering](), [selenium](), [software](), [software-testing](), [test-coverage](), [testing](), [webdriver]() ### AI overview This speaker spotlight discusses how Andrew Knight combines open-source advocacy with enterprise software testing. It focuses on AI-powered test generation, behavior-driven development, context engineering, human oversight, and tools such as Selenium WebDriver, Playwright AI tooling, CLI skills, and an MCP server. ### Source excerpt Explore how Andrew Knight is using AI, behavior-driven development, and context engineering to reshape enterprise software testing at BrowserStack Breakpoint 2026. This speaker spotlight dives into AI-powered QA, test automation, and the future of modern quality engineering. ## Learning Path: Testing and Continuous Integration DevFeed: [Learning Path: Testing and Continuous Integration]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Real Python Published: 2024-11-14T12:00:00Z Content type: tutorial Language: en Sources: [Real Python]() Topics: [Python](), [Software Testing](), [CI/CD](), [GitHub Actions](), [Unit testing](), [Code quality](), [Docker](), [Mocking](), [Test-driven development]() Tags: [ci-cd](), [code-quality](), [docker](), [github-actions](), [learning](), [mocking](), [pytest](), [python](), [testing](), [tutorial]() ### AI overview A learning path for testing Python applications, covering unittest, doctest, mock objects, pytest, code quality, and continuous integration with GitHub Actions and Docker. ### Source excerpt Learn how to test Python code with unittest, doctest, pytest, and mock objects. Set up continuous integration with GitHub Actions and Docker. ## Leveraging AI in Software Testing DevFeed: [Leveraging AI in Software Testing]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2022-06-07T00:00:00Z Content type: tutorial Language: en Sources: [Kt. Academy]() Topics: [Artificial Intelligence](), [Software Testing](), [Algorithms]() Tags: [ai](), [algorithms](), [software](), [software-testing](), [workshop-learning-programming]() ### AI overview The article discusses using AI-based algorithms in software testing and suggests that AI can reduce some manual effort in development-related tasks. ### Source excerpt As AI is confronting us in our daily lives and it is improving the development activities by eliminating some manual efforts, it is beneficial to embrace in our tasks. We will see how we can utilize AI based algorithms in Software Testing. ## Software Testing Standards (Aligned with ISTQB) DevFeed: [Software Testing Standards (Aligned with ISTQB)]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2022-05-31T00:00:00Z Content type: tutorial Language: en Sources: [Kt. Academy]() Topics: [Software Testing](), [Testing](), [maintenance]() Tags: [maintenance](), [software-testing](), [standards](), [testing](), [workshop](), [workshop-learning-programming]() ### AI overview This workshop explains how aligning software testing activities with ISTQB standards can support efficient work and help teams manage project scope and deadlines. It covers software testing stages from definition through maintenance. ### Source excerpt Aligning our testing activities with ISTQB standards helps us to perform efficiently and cope with project scope and deadlines. In this workshop we will go over software testing stages starting from definition to maintenance. ## Integration Testing in Go: Part I - Executing Tests with Docker DevFeed: [Integration Testing in Go: Part I - Executing Tests with Docker]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2019-03-18T00:00:00Z Content type: tutorial Language: en Sources: [William Kennedy]() Topics: [Integration testing](), [Go Language](), [Software Testing](), [Docker](), [Docker Compose](), [Databases](), [Messaging]() Tags: [ardan-labs](), [blog](), [compose](), [databases](), [docker](), [go](), [go-programming](), [golang](), [integration-testing](), [messaging](), [programming](), [testing]() ### AI overview A tutorial on integration testing in Go. It explains how to use Docker and Docker Compose to run Go tests alongside application dependencies such as databases and messaging systems in a restrictive environment without Go pre-installed. ### Source excerpt Introduction "Testing leads to failure, and failure leads to understanding." - Burt Rutan Burt Rutan is an aerospace engineer who designed Voyager, the first plane to fly around the world without stopping or refueling. Although Rutan was not a software engineer, his words speak volumes to the importance of testing, even testing software. Testing software in all forms is extremely important, whether it be unit, integration, system, or acceptance testing. However, depending on the project, one form of testing can be more valuable than the others. In other words, sometimes one form of testing can lead to better understanding about the health and integrity of the software than the other forms.