Student and Parent can have the same number

[jaejayrome]

Description: A student and a parent can have the same number, as a tester, I am unsure from the UG and confused with the constraints of phone number on whether does it apply between the student and the parent.

Evidence:

Suggestions: Make it more explicit that a student and a parent can have the same number as well and the constraints are being carried over.

[nus-se-bot]

Team's Response

As explained in #489 and #5368, which are duplicates

The 'Original' Bug

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

TutorPro allows duplicate persons with same name and email

Outline The UG states that TutorPro does not allow duplicate persons. They can have the same name but phone and email must be unique.

Evidence in UG

What actually happens? It seems that TutorPro actually does not allow people of same names, but allows people of same phone and email. Please see the evidence below.

Why Medium Severity If users don't figure this out themselves, they might not be able to enter any users as TutorPro will block the command actions. The UG and app behaviour are different.

Same name different phone and email: Screenshot See index 9 and my command input.

Different name but same phone and email: Screenshot See index 11 and 12.

---

_{[original: nus-cs2103-AY2324S2/pe-interim#5216] [original labels: type.FunctionalityBug severity.Medium]}

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

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

This is actually a documentation bug as it is intended for students to be able to have the same phone number and email. This is because especially for younger students, their point-of-contact might be their parents, and if they have the same point-of-contact, they will have the same phone number and email.

Hence this part is a low severity documentation bug.

For the name part, it is a functionality bug. However, this will not cause a huge inconvenience to the user as they can just add numbering if they happen to have students/parents with the same names, e.g. if there are 3 Jane Does (which is already highly unlikely), they can just save their contact names as Jane Doe 1, Jane Doe 2, and Jane Doe 3.

Hence, this bug with the names is not as important as the work already done in v1.4. Hence, it is a low severity documentation bug.

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 type Team chose [`type.DocumentationBug`] Originally [`type.FeatureFlaw`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** I disagree because when I first read the UG, the rationale mentioned in the UG stating that how 2 persons in the application should have unique phone number or email addresses is valid, given how there might be future extensions that would help to identify a particular individual through a phone number or an email address. In this case, the team fails to recognise that younger students might not have their own phone number or email addresses which they should have implemented as either an optional field for a student. This issue comes about when the implementation treats a parent and a student as the same "person" which should not happen since they different attributes and behaviours based on OOP. Therefore, this problem goes beyond just a 'hot fix' of denouncing it as a documentation bug where the problem lies with the implementation itself.

---

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

---