nus-se-script
commented
9 months ago [IMPORTANT!: Please do not edit or reply to this comment using the GitHub UI. You can respond to it using CATcher during the next phase of the PE]
Team's Response
This feature flaw was already specified in the ug as one of the warnings, and there is already a section in the dg for future features for it. The reason why this feature is implemented as a future feature is because :
- The effort required to implement this feature to the current state of the product is way too high as you not only need to consider editing the doctor but you also need the impact editing a doctor's detail has on other feature such as appiintments. This will cause a lot of bugs that is going to take a lot of effort and time to fix and test.
- This feature is not strictly required for this product to function as you can just delete a doctor and add another doctor as mentioned in the UG. The current implementation already took a lot of effor and time to implement without a lot of major bugs due to the relationship between patient doctor and appointment. This means that changing one of those aspects can potentially break the software. It took a lot of effort to implement add and delete doctor while not breaking any of the other commands. Adding the edit doctor feature would then further complicate things even more than one can realize and can have a lot of negative effects to the software if done incorrectly.
The WARNING in the UG:
The future features in the DG:
Therefore we have fulfilled the conditions for not in scope
From the reasons mentioned above we have fulfilled the condition in order for this feature flaw to be considered NotInScope from the cs2103 website.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.NotInScope]
- [ ] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your reason]
If I wrongly add a doctor, the only way to fix it is to delete the doctor and add a new one, which is inconvient.