Overzealous Duplication Detection - Suppliers should be allowed to supply multiple items

[XenonShawn]

It is very common for suppliers to supply more than one ingredient. Thus, it is a feature flaw to detect duplicate suppliers using only the name of the supplier without considering the ingredient as well, even if documented in the UG.

Medium severity as this situation will occur often, but users may continue to use the app, and perhaps workaround this issue by adding the ingredient to the name of the supplier. High severity might be warranted otherwise, as without the workaround, a user which only procures ingredients from one supplier will find it infeasible to use this app.

[nus-se-bot]

Team's Response

Intended behaviour for now, which is documented in the UG. The consideration is that usually each supply item comes from different supplier.

The 'Original' Bug

[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]

Supplier can only supply one item

Using the example given in the add command, I've added a Yoyo Pte Ltd supplier that supplies Ginger. I then tried to add another Yoyo Pte Ltd supplier that supplies Egg instead. While I understand that it is mentioned in the UG that:

However, would it not be a reasonable assumption that in reality, a supplier can supply a canteen vendors with multiple ingredients? It seems impractical for a canteen vendor to source their ingredients from multiple suppliers for each ingredient, as they likely have a working relationship with a few select suppliers.

---

_{[original: nus-cs2103-AY2223S1/pe-interim#2498] [original labels: type.FeatureFlaw severity.Low]}

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]

This is intended.

This is quite realistic because canteen vendors operate on a much smaller scale than restaurants.

Edit: accepted due to the possibility of food vendor ordering multiple different vegetable from same supplier.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue duplicate status

Team chose to mark this issue as a duplicate of another issue (as explained in the Team's response above)

• [ ] 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: The team accepted the response from another student with a lower severity rating, with the reason "accepted due to the possibility of food vendor ordering multiple different vegetable from same supplier".

Personally, this statement is quite significant as many canteen stores use vegetables in their cooking (eg cai png, mala, salad, stores providing garnishes like chicken rice, etc). But even then, many other stalls are likely to use the same ingredients. For instance, drinks stalls are likely to procure the fruits from the same place.

Following the guidelines,

Since this issue is not rare and causes more than a minor inconvenience, it is minimally a severity medium.

However, I now think that it could possibly be a severity high. My original justification for it not being high was that the user could "perhaps workaround this issue by adding the ingredient to the name of the supplier", ie change the name of the supplier so that duplicate detection does not trigger. However, I now know that two suppliers cannot have the same phone numbers as that will trigger the duplicate detection, so this point is moot.

Without being able to add multiple ingredients from the same supplier, and considering how common this situation is, this can make the application unusable for many users. I think that this issue could be a severity large. If not, at least severity medium.

---