search

DINESH1201 / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Wrong error message when extra parameter is used (promote command) #6

Open DINESH1201 opened 1 week ago

DINESH1201 commented 1 week ago

If the user were to key in the promote command with the ced parameter, there is an error stating that the contract end date is in the wrong format / invalid date. Instead, there should be an error saying "Invalid command format". This is misleading as the user might not understand what went wrong just from the error message.

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Type promote 1 ced/2026-10-10 Screenshot 2024-11-15 at 4.55.45 PM.pngScreenshot 2024-11-15 at 4.55.45 PM

Result: Even though the date i entered is in the valid format and a valid date, the error shown is saying that it is an invalid date/wrong format.

Expected Result: Show an error message saying invalid command format. Similar to what is shown below. Screenshot 2024-11-15 at 5.03.30 PM.pngScreenshot 2024-11-15 at 5.03.30 PM

nus-pe-script commented 1 week ago

Team's Response

Reason for dropping to severity low

This appears only in rare situations where the user accidentally puts ced/ for contract end dates which should not happen if they follow the UG.

Reason for feature flaw

This is not a functionality bug as it is perfectly valid for "ced/2026-10-10" to be treated as the contract end date and reported as an error as we did not include any use of prefixes in the promote command and our UG clearly states how the command should be used with examples given.

image.png

Our promote command in the help window also gave clear examples of how the command should be used.

image.png

Therefore, it is a feature flaw as the current design could be better by throwing a more specific error message.

Reason for not in scope

This is a valid concern as users may make a mistake and think that a prefix is required. However, this is not in the scope as checking for ced/ is lower priority as it is a rare case and our current error message is still valid and correct.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.NotInScope]

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

## :question: Issue type Team chose [`type.FeatureFlaw`] Originally [`type.FunctionalityBug`] - [ ] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** [replace this with your explanation]
## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.Low`] Originally [`severity.Medium`] - [ ] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** [replace this with your explanation]