Open Timenikhil opened 1 week ago
CS2103T website states that we do not need to acknowledge code reuse from AB3.
Team chose [response.Rejected
]
Reason for disagreement: Plagiarism is very clearly not just a cosmetic issue. It is a very serious academic offense under NUS policy.
AddressBook was not properly acknowledged in the Developer Guide under the acknowledgements section where use of AI tools was acknowledged. The team did not mention that BridalBoss (the product), is built upon or forked from AB3, which could mislead external developers unfamiliar with AB3. The exemption states that code reuse
does not need to be credited/acknowledged specifically
. However for external developers, it would be at least reasonable to mention that the project builds upon AB3, otherwise they might believe that the team build the entire thing from scratch. Even though Github maintains fork information, it could be erased, when switching repository providers like migrating to Gitlab or BitBucket or in the shipped product, where the github repo is no longer accessible. The Developer Guide is supposed to bridge this gap and provide such information about the project's origins.
This would be similar to for example Microsoft Edge not acknowledging that they are built on Chromium, built by their competitor
Moreover while the exclusion applies to code and design, I am not sure how far it applies to the developer guide and user guide itself which retains information from AB3, and contain stray references to AddressBook, without any links to AB3.
Moreover, the acknowledgement for AI tools was too vague and general, not describing which part or even how much of the team project was done by the group and how much by generative AI. Moreover, besides GitHub Copilot the other gen AI tools were just marked as generative AI, so we have no idea how powerful these tools were.
The developer Guide does not credit AddressBook for its source code, as required by team Project guidelines.