I’ve worked on government IT systems and their definition of fully QA’ed code can be pretty heavy.
The project I worked on required that changes to be printed, documented, bound in a paper manual, and put on a shelf after it went through a QA process where somebody had to write a test script, print, and bind that. There was a whole acceptance procedure that a state official had to sign off on after all that before it was deployed.
That was only what happened after a feature was implemented—I can’t imagine what it must have been like to define, design, and implement the feature.
A lot of that is OK, but the insistence the state had on print, binding, and shelving the documentation felt a bit extreme. It also took forever to get changed from idea to production, which is a feature or a bug depending on your agenda.
The project I worked on required that changes to be printed, documented, bound in a paper manual, and put on a shelf after it went through a QA process where somebody had to write a test script, print, and bind that. There was a whole acceptance procedure that a state official had to sign off on after all that before it was deployed.
That was only what happened after a feature was implemented—I can’t imagine what it must have been like to define, design, and implement the feature.
A lot of that is OK, but the insistence the state had on print, binding, and shelving the documentation felt a bit extreme. It also took forever to get changed from idea to production, which is a feature or a bug depending on your agenda.