nus-se-script
commented
1 year ago Team's Response
No details provided by team.
The 'Original' Bug
[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]
Lack of event edit
There's an event add, delete, and find commands, but the lack of an event edit functionality makes the event feature to be 'less useful to the intended target user for normal usage'
The user has to delete the event and add a new one, due to the lack of an edit event functionality.
This should cause at least occasional inconvenience.
[original: nus-cs2103-AY2223S2/pe-interim#2665] [original labels: severity.Medium type.FeatureFlaw]
Their Response to the 'Original' Bug
[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]
As TinS is likely to store events after they are already set such as interviews, OA dates, etc. The likeliness of editing an internship is low. In the case that user does want to edit an event, they can easily delete the event and add a new one.
Putting an edit event command increases the complexity of the software unnecessarily.
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 response Team chose [`response.Rejected`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** I beg to differ from the team's response for the following reasons: > As TinS is likely to store events after they are already set such as interviews, OA dates, etc. The likeliness of editing an internship is low. I disagree with this statement. While it is true that details of events are typically entered into the app after they have been set, this information is not guaranteed to be static. Deadlines can be postponed, and events like interviews can be rescheduled. In fact, the possibility of these fields changing is much higher than fields like the position and company of the internship application. On top of that, it is also possible for a user to make a genuine error while inputting event details into the app. Therefore, the likeliness of editing an event should not be considered low, as it supports real user needs. > Putting an edit event command increases the complexity of the software unnecessarily. I disagree with this statement as well. As a user, I do not see how supporting an additional `event edit` command will increase the complexity of the software due to the following reasons: - The app already supports an edit feature with respect to details of the main internship application. Since the usage of this `edit` command and a potential `event edit` command will not differ too greatly, it can be assumed that the user can pick up the latter quickly as long as they are already familiar with usage of the former. - In terms of implementation, it should not take too much effort as well. This is because the logic behind this feature is similar to the one behind the `edit` command. Since the team is not required to come up with the logic for the suggested `event edit` command from scratch, the complexity of implementing this feature should be comparable to that of other existing features, and should not be unmanageable within the scope of v1.4. - CRUD operations -- Create, Read, Update, and Delete -- are basic operations that any software application should be able to support; an edit event feature is no exception. In summary, while the `event` feature is a good addition to the app that allows users to manage their events associated with each internship application, a missing `event edit` operation regrettably makes it incomplete and "less useful" from the perspective of a user. The alternative solution provided by the team -- to delete the event and add a new one as a workaround for the edit operation -- also lacks in persuasiveness, since it defeats the goal that the feature/app should be well-optimised for fast-typists. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, I stand by my original view that the lack of an edit event feature is a valid feature flaw.
## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.Medium`] Originally [`severity.Low`] - [ ] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** [replace this with your explanation]
Currently, users have no way of editing events directly. They would first have to delete the event, before adding the event with modified details again.
This is highly inefficient for an app that should be optimised for fast typists.