search

fymbc / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Deleted deliveries are not deleted for corresponding assigned employees #8

Open fymbc opened 1 week ago

fymbc commented 1 week ago

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Do inspect 1 or index of a client.
  2. Add new item. I used the one given in help command. add i/Monitor i/Mouse e/2020-02-02 a/311, Clementi Ave 2, #02-25, S120300 c/$100 s/not delivered t/Difficult address to deliver t/Best before Wednesday

image.png

  1. Go back and select an employee. I changed Bernice Yu to employee (i.e. edit 2 r/employee).

image.png

  1. Inspect same client you added delivery for and assign it to the chosen employee (i.e. inspect 1 followed by assign 1 n/Bernice Yu)

image.png

  1. Go back and inspect that chosen employee. One can see it is correctly assigned.

image.png

  1. Go back to client and delete that delivery

image.png

  1. Go to chosen employee assigned to that delivery.

image.png

One can see that the delivery that was deleted for the client was not erased for the employee. This is somewhat unintuitive because the delivery technically should not exist anymore, yet still does in the employee's assigned list. This behaviour is also not specified in the UG, so I am unsure if this is the behaviour that the team desires.

soc-se-bot commented 1 week ago

Team's Response

Users might want records of deliveries done by employees, and to be kept separate from the records of clients, in case they want to track the deliveries done by the workers. Users can still remove the delivery from the employee separately with the remove command.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

Reason for disagreement: I believe this can be clearly stated in your user guide that is functionality is intended, however it is not. As such, as a user, I would assume that all deliveries corresponding/related should be removed together. I believe workarounds exists so I agree with downgrading to Low, but it should be NotInScope because it can be made clearer in the UG.

## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.Low`] Originally [`severity.Medium`] - [ ] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** [replace this with your explanation]