nus-pe-bot
commented
3 days ago Team's Response
What the tester proposed is a missing feature i.e. marking an order as Cancelled or Refunded. It falls under response.NotInScope because it is a missing feature that is less important than the work already done and the user cannot attempt to use this missing feature in the first place.
However, we do acknowledge that this is a good proposal and can be implemented in future implementations.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.NotInScope]
- [ ] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]
## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.Low`] Originally [`severity.Medium`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** I believe the severity can be reasonably argued as Medium instead of Low. The absence of additional statuses, such as "Cancelled" or "Refunded," may not prevent users from using the product but can cause occasional inconvenience. For instance, users who manage a diverse set of order outcomes might need to rely on workarounds (such as using tags) to track non-standard order statuses. This limitation could disrupt workflows for some users, especially those handling order cancellations or refunds regularly, which is common in business contexts. Thus, while the product remains usable, this flaw introduces inconvenience to a subset of users, aligning with the definition of severity.Medium as "a flaw that causes occasional inconvenience to some users, but they can continue to use the product."
Currently only Pending and Completed
Missing states such as