I suggest you add some CI-based testing, primarly on the areas that break most frequently. That will help you increase quality as work is being done on the project.

It's also becomes more apparent which areas/functionality break more often and thus it's easier to decide which parts need refactoring.

Adding more manual testing risks having the project go the wrong way in terms of $$$ & time required per feature added.

Some code review is good to, but maybe that's part of the A->B->C->A testing scheme. (Maybe code review in the other direction?)

I suggest you add some CI-based testing, primarly on the areas that break most frequently. That will help you increase quality as work is being done on the project.

It's also becomes more apparent which areas/functionality break more often and thus it's easier to decide which parts need refactoring, or at least increased testing.

Adding more manual testing risks having the project go the wrong way in terms of $$$ & time required per feature added.

Some code review is good to, but maybe that's part of the A->B->C->A testing scheme. (Maybe code review in the other direction?)

I suggest you add some CI-based testing, primarly on the areas that break most frequently. That will help you increase quality as work is being done on the project.

It's also bevomes more apparent which areas/functionality break more often and thus it's easier to decide which parts need refactoring.

Adding more manual testing risks having the project go the wrong way in terms of $$$ & time required per feature added.

Some code review is good to, but myabe that's part of the A->B->C->A testing scheme. (Maybe code review in the other direction?)

I suggest you add some CI-based testing, primarly on the areas that break most frequently. That will help you increase quality as work is being done on the project.

It's also becomes more apparent which areas/functionality break more often and thus it's easier to decide which parts need refactoring.

Adding more manual testing risks having the project go the wrong way in terms of $$$ & time required per feature added.

Some code review is good to, but maybe that's part of the A->B->C->A testing scheme. (Maybe code review in the other direction?)