search

Shauryan123 / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Two people with same names but different emails and different phone numbers are not allowed in the contact list #9

Open Shauryan123 opened 5 months ago

Shauryan123 commented 5 months ago

Two people with same names but different emails are not allowed in the contact list cannot be considered as duplicates because there a lot of people with the same name .

Steps to reproduce: Command to enter: edit bernice yu -n John Doe

Here the email of bernice yu is different and so the edit to the name should be allowed but we get an error saying , the contact already exists

Screenshot 2024-04-19 at 4.35.51 PM.png

soc-se-bot commented 5 months ago

Team's Response

Thank you for your bug report. Unfortunately, our team will be rejecting this bug since the behavior is clearly documented in the user guide, and we already included instructions on how to resolve this issue in Page 7 of the user guide:

A courseMate's name is case-insensitive. Adding a new courseMate with the same string but different capitalization will be rejected.
Consider adding a suffix to the name to differentiate them.

Considering that we encourage users to use nicknames to identify courseMates, adding the suffix does not cause any issues. We also need to use the name as an unique identifier to a courseMate so it will not be a wise decision to allow that.

Therefore, we are downgrading the severity of the bug to Low while rejecting it.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

Reason for disagreement: I strongly disagree with the team’s decision to reject this bug. The application’s inability to differentiate between individuals who share the same name but have distinct emails and phone numbers is a significant limitation in its design. This restriction not only deviates from real-world scenarios where people often share names but also impedes the application's practical usability. In a diverse academic environment like NUS, it is common to encounter multiple individuals with the same name. The application’s insistence on using the name as a unique identifier without considering other differentiating attributes such as email and phone number reduces its effectiveness and flexibility in managing a realistic user database. This functionality is crucial for ensuring that the application can serve a broader user base efficiently without forcing unnatural modifications to their data (like adding suffixes), which could lead to confusion and data integrity issues.

## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.Low`] Originally [`severity.High`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** The decision to downgrade the severity of this issue to Low is also highly contestable. Considering the frequency and likelihood of encountering individuals with the same name, the application’s inability to handle such common occurrences should be regarded as a high-severity issue. This limitation not only affects a small subset of users but potentially a large segment of the user base, particularly in an international and culturally diverse setting like NUS. By not addressing this issue, the application risks alienating users and failing to meet basic data management requirements, making it less competitive and effective as a tool for managing contacts within a university context. The severity of this bug should indeed be maintained as High because of its substantial impact on usability and user experience.