Questions About UAT, Documentations and "phase"

1)  What are some of your ideas for incorporating UAT within the sprint, in order to meet your DoD?

2)  Scrum doesn't specify how much documentation you should or should not produce.   You should create and maintain whatever level of documentation is needed in order to support the delivery of functionality each sprint.   

Keep in mind that the Agile Manifesto values Working Software over Comprehensive Documentation; however, that doesn't translate to a recommended level of documentation needed.   What is important is that, regardless of the level of documentation required, that it does not replace the conversation(s) that must take place between the Development Team and the Product Owner / stakeholders regarding the product backlog items.

3)  Whatever you do in implementing Scrum, do not approach your sprints as a mini-waterfall (phases).   To answer your question, it is not appropriate from a Scrum perspective to do as you proposed.

Thanks Timothy

1) From the Scrum guide

"Each Increment is additive to all prior Increments and thoroughly tested, ensuring that all Increments work together."

Thus, I think that the UAT should be included in the DoD. 

Besides, after the sprint completed, there should be a potential releasable increments.

By releasable, I assume, it means it can be deployed to production. Thus, the task should include uat.

Correct me if I am wrong.

2) It seems that it quite hard to take a balance.....especially the traditional TDS and FDS are very comprehensive..

3) Then Do we have SIT and UAT period?

I understand that every task should be independently developed and tested.

However, we still need to do an end to end testing for an increment. 

The Scrum Team need to refine the Product Backlog Item with the key stakeholders. It is a good place to craft the UAT together (see 3 amigos https://www.agilealliance.org/glossary/three-amigos/#q=~(filters~(postType~(~'page~'post~'aa_book~'aa_event_session~'aa_experience_report~'aa_glossary~'aa_research_paper~'aa_video)~tags~(~'three*20amigos))~searchTerm~'~sort~false~sortDirection~'asc~page~1)

After the UAT are clear for everybody, the Dev Team should be able to run the UAT on its own.

We have a process where the Dev do their own Unit tests and then builds are automated if the Dev feels its ready for  QA. QA verifies all moving parts and regression test suite pass. Then the feature/US is "done"  , and at end of sprint what is "done" is demoed . 

If PO and stakeholders agree, this gets released to  the UAT ENV. Based on feedback from customer/Biz, PO again adds items to PB.

I think that the UAT should be included in the DoD. 

Executing user acceptance tests successfully ought to be part of the DoD. Defining what those test conditions are, however, might be a condition of “ready”. Bear in mind that Testable is one of the INVEST criteria. Therefore it might reasonably be considered during refinement, as Olivier has indicated.

The traditional TDS and FDS are very comprehensive

Do they add value to the increment? What do they evidence which a demonstrably working increment cannot? They may be thought important in a stage-gated development process where empirical evidence is delayed, but in an iterative and incremental one might this kind of documentation be waste?