search

connlim / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Archive feature does not do what it says it does #7

Open connlim opened 1 year ago

connlim commented 1 year ago

As stated in the DG, the archive feature lets users archive "existing stalls/reviews". It is claimed that this feature is implemented by simply copying the data file to another location. However, due to how the data is stored in the JSON file, this does not let the user archive stalls OR reviews. It only lets the user archive stalls AND reviews. To archive only reviews or only stalls requires heavy JSON editing which is no user-friendly. This is contrary to what the DG says is a complete feature

DG

image.png

JSON data example

{
  "stalls" : [ {
    "name" : "fasdff",
    "address" : "jkfsd/afgisd;d/seie/(P*(#%&#)",
    "tags" : [ "chickenrice" ],
    "reviews" : [ {
      "date" : "01/11/2000",
      "content" : "Very tasty. Worth the trip",
      "rating" : 5,
      "tags" : [ "travelworthy" ]
    } ]
  }, {
    "name" : "John Chicken Rice",
    "address" : "Blk 30 Lorong 3 Serangoon Gardens, #07-18",
    "tags" : [ "charkwaytiao" ],
    "reviews" : [ ]
  }, {
    "name" : "Yu Bak Chor Mee",
    "address" : "Blk 11 Ang Mo Kio Street 74, #11-04",
    "tags" : [ "bakchormee" ],
    "reviews" : [ ]
  }, {
    "name" : "Irfan Muslim Food",
    "address" : "Blk 436 Serangoon Gardens Street 26, #16-43",
    "tags" : [ "muslim", "halal", "family" ],
    "reviews" : [ {
      "date" : "11/01/2022",
      "content" : "Very affordable",
      "rating" : 3,
      "tags" : [ "halal" ]
    } ]
  } ]
}
nus-se-script commented 1 year ago

Team's Response

Archive existing stalls/reviews -> Archiving reviews without stalls is considered impossible as the review should at least keep track of the stall information. -> Archiving stalls without reviews would be possible after implementation of the clear all review command, so even if this is a missing requirement, it is covered by the written future features under the user guide. -> Archiving stalls and reviews is already covered

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue type

Team chose [type.DocumentationBug] Originally [type.FeatureFlaw]

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]