FestiveCat / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Provided base information is insufficient to do easy testing within 60mins #4

Open FestiveCat opened 2 years ago

FestiveCat commented 2 years ago

image.png

Above is some of the default information within the software. Note that the type, location, address and price fields are all empty. Some commands (ie match) requires those fields to be filled in before they can be tested to work. This hence makes it difficult to test as the commands are separated into buyers/sellers, but the match commands are under the buyers, which cannot be done yet (as sellers is after buyers):

image.png

soc-pe-bot commented 2 years ago

Team's Response

We already created the clients for you. You can test the add and edit functions out as you go along at your own pace. Here are the list of features flaw that we accept:

image.png

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

Reason for disagreement: > You can test the add and edit functions out as you go along at your own pace.

Not what this issue is about.

Here are the list of features flaw that we accept:

Within the stated issues, "Hard-to-test features" are one of them.

As stated above, the "match" commands are sectioned under "buyer" which come before the "seller" section. Hence, going sequentially, it would be logical for the tester to go through all the "buyer" features before the "seller" features. However, the "match" commands require both the "buyer" and "seller" features to be done before any "match" command can be done.

This could have been alleviated with default values for the sample data, or a reordering of the sections/subsections.

The fact that there is no mention of needing to have the values already set from the "seller" commands when reading the UG sequentially, plus the lack of a "user workflow/usage flow" to guide the user/tester on the steps they should take in relation to which commands, only makes this worse.

When going sequentially, the match command will execute nicely even though not a single seller has an initialised location/address/housing type/price range, and hence showing 0 sellers. This is the expected behaviour but makes it very annoying to test the features.


:question: Issue severity

Team chose [severity.Low] Originally [severity.Medium]

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]