nus-pe-script
commented
4 months ago Team's Response
Thank you for your feedback!
The expectation laid out in the course website is as follows: “Update the User Guide (UG) and the Developer Guide (DG) parts that are related to the enhancements you added.” As we did not modify the base address book, we will not change the developer guide as that would imply unnecessary refactoring of the codebase, potentially introducing unnecessary bugs.
Hence, we believe this to be a flaw, not a bug, that we will look to improve upon in future iterations when we have more time. We designate this issue as NotInScope, following the course website's description of NotInScope as: "a flaw (e.g., a missing feature, a suboptimal design of a feature, a known bug) can be considered NotInScope if rectifying it is less important (based on the value/effort considerations) than the work that has been done already (because it is fine to delay lower priority work until future iterations)." which we believe encompasses this issue.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.NotInScope]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: It is a documentation issue. This screenshot is taken from the section with [proposed] Undo/Redo feature which was originally found in the Developer Guide of AB3. Since the application is not AB3 anymore, failing to remove this proposed feature raises the possibility of user confusion regarding what the proposed implementation entails. Ensuring that there are no traces of AB3 left maintains consistency and avoids confusion for users who are not familiar with AB3 and its features.
It is highly possible that this portion of the DG is a direct copy from the AB3 DG and might not be relevant to the team's application.
If it is supposed to be the intended proposed implementation for the application, traces of AB3 should not be present. Instead, changing the terms to suit the application will be much more appropriate. For instance, a more appropriate choice of name would be using VersionedPatientData instead of VersionedAddressBook.
In this case, this is deemed as a documentation bug and not a flaw that is not in scope.
In the screenshot below, it can be seen that both the diagrams as well as the paragraph contains traces of AB3. As the app is not an AB3 app anymore, it would be better for all traces of AB3 to be changed, including all other diagrams that are in the Developer Guide but not shown in the screenshot.