Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

ISTQB CT-TAE Exam - Topic 5 Question 37 Discussion

Actual exam question for ISTQB's CT-TAE exam
Question #: 37
Topic #: 5
[All CT-TAE Questions]

You have inherited a TAS that is working well it uses keyword-driven scripting and was well architected. The automation architect who built the system has now moved on to another company. The TAS is working across several projects and has a multiple library of keywords, categorised by project. The individual project teams maintain these keyword scripts.

Based only on the given information, what is the MOST significant risk for the TAS?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

by Viva at Sep 11, 2024, 10:52 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CT-TAE Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Daren
6 months ago
The architect's departure makes maintenance tricky for sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lavera
6 months ago
I think the coding standards issue is a real concern too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Josephine
6 months ago
Wait, how can new projects not work well? Seems unlikely.
upvoted 0 times
...
Talia
7 months ago
Totally agree, that's a big risk!
upvoted 0 times
...
Kallie
7 months ago
The keyword scripts may become out of date if not maintained.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dominga
7 months ago
I think option D is a real concern too. With different teams managing their own scripts, there’s a chance that coding standards could vary widely, which could lead to issues down the line.
upvoted 0 times
...
Anissa
7 months ago
I feel like new projects might struggle with the TAS since it’s tailored for existing ones. But I’m not confident if that’s the biggest risk. Maybe option C?
upvoted 0 times
...
Jesse
7 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think the departure of the architect could really complicate things. The level of abstraction might make it hard for new team members to understand the system, which sounds like option B.
upvoted 0 times
...
Deandrea
8 months ago
I remember we discussed how keyword-driven frameworks can lead to maintenance issues if the scripts aren't regularly updated. So, option A seems plausible.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jessenia
8 months ago
The lack of consistent coding standards across the different teams maintaining the keyword scripts is what stands out to me as the most significant risk.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chandra
8 months ago
I'm a bit worried about the possibility of new projects not working well with the TAS. That could be a major issue down the line.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dominga
8 months ago
The level of abstraction and the architect's departure could make the system hard to maintain, which seems like a pretty big risk to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rene
8 months ago
Hmm, the keyword-driven scripts being out of date is definitely a concern, but I'm not sure if that's the most significant risk here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Winfred
8 months ago
This seems like a tricky one. I'll need to carefully consider the risks mentioned and think about which one is the most significant.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dewitt
8 months ago
I think the answer is B. The ALTER VIEW command should allow me to update the columns referenced in the view without having to recreate the entire thing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mertie
1 year ago
Option C? Really? New projects not working as well? That's like saying 'my car works great, but I better not try to use it for anything else.' Clearly the most significant risk is the architect's departure.
upvoted 0 times
Ellsworth
12 months ago
D) Because the keyword scripts are maintained by different teams, there is a likelihood that good coding standards are not followed
upvoted 0 times
...
Leonie
1 year ago
B) The level of abstraction, coupled with the departure of the architect may make the system hard to maintain
upvoted 0 times
...
Zoila
1 year ago
A) The keyword driven scripts may become out of date if not maintained
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Clay
1 year ago
I'd pick option A. As the keyword scripts age and project teams change, keeping those scripts up-to-date is going to be critical. Outdated scripts could cause all sorts of problems.
upvoted 0 times
Veronika
1 year ago
It's important for the project teams to work together to ensure the keyword scripts are maintained properly to avoid any issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sharika
1 year ago
True, if good coding standards are not followed, it could lead to inconsistencies and errors in the TAS.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carlene
1 year ago
I think option B is also a significant risk. The level of abstraction could make it difficult for new team members to understand and maintain the system.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rashad
1 year ago
I agree, keeping the keyword scripts up-to-date is crucial for the TAS to continue working well.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Twila
1 year ago
I'm going with option D. With different teams managing the keyword scripts, consistency in coding standards is likely to be a major challenge. That could lead to a messy, unmaintainable system down the line.
upvoted 0 times
Dewitt
1 year ago
Yes, it's definitely a risk when multiple teams are involved in maintaining the scripts.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hubert
1 year ago
I agree, consistency in coding standards is crucial for maintainability.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Bea
1 year ago
I believe the level of abstraction, coupled with the departure of the architect, may make the system hard to maintain. That's a big risk too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Meghan
1 year ago
Hmm, the most significant risk seems to be option B - the abstraction level and the architect's departure could make the system hard to maintain. Without the original architect's guidance, the complex keyword scripts might become a maintenance nightmare.
upvoted 0 times
Lorriane
1 year ago
True, it's important to have consistent coding standards to ensure the TAS remains reliable and easy to maintain.
upvoted 0 times
...
Diego
1 year ago
That's a good point. It could definitely cause issues if each team is following different coding practices.
upvoted 0 times
...
Helga
1 year ago
But what about option D? Different teams maintaining the scripts could lead to inconsistencies in coding standards.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tien
1 year ago
I agree, option B does seem like a major risk. The system might become too complex to handle without the architect.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Annelle
1 year ago
I agree with you, Nadine. If the scripts are not updated regularly, it could lead to failures in automation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nadine
1 year ago
I think the most significant risk is that the keyword driven scripts may become out of date if not maintained.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel