Duplicate detection for Add

[jiahui0309]

Steps:

1. run add n/James Ho p/22224444 e/jamesho@example.com a/123, Clementi Rd, 1234665 t/friend t/colleague
2. run add n/James Ho p/22224444 e/jamesho@example.com a/123, Clementi Rd, 1234665 t/friend t/colleague

expected: to throw an error to users indicating that the names are the same. this is different from your planned enhancements 3 as ur app allows people with sematically same name to be added

actual: successful addition

Your UG mentioned that it will be processed as a single space, but it is not followed. but I will put low instead of med

[nus-se-bot]

Team's Response

No details provided by team.

The 'Original' Bug

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

Allow adding duplicated email address for add command

As shown in the screenshot below, the program allow user to insert duplicated email address for different person (Client index 12 and 13).

In real-world scenario, email address should be unique, and no more than one person can have the same email address. In this case, it will cause the user to send information to the wrong person as the email address entered are duplicated and caused inconvenience to the user to double check the accuracy of insertion.

It would be great for the team to detect duplication in the insertion of email address such that duplicated email address is not allowed/ warning message can be shown.

---

_{[original: nus-cs2103-AY2324S2/pe-interim#390] [original labels: severity.Medium type.FeatureFlaw]}

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

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

In our documentation, we stated the following:

We downgraded the severity to low, as this scenario only happens rarely (people do not edit their client's emails to be duplicates of other client's emails often, if not at all).

This case also qualifies for the highlighted case, as duplicate detection based on email is currently not a feature, although it has been identified as a planned enhancement, and trying to use the missing feature does not cause the software to crash.

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)

• [x] I disagree

Reason for disagreement: Hi! I understand that your team may have classified my bug report to be a duplicate as Allow adding duplicated email address for add command, since they are similar. However, I took the time to read through the planned enhancements and did not raise the issue of duplicate emails. My report came from the fact that the documentation said that name will be processed as a single space, but it is not followed. Furthermore, the issue of duplicate emails can be solved using your planned enhancements, but not the extra spaces between names.

Also, I am not very sure the reason for duplicating these bugs, since this can be fixed independently from the original bug

Thank you :)

---

## :question: Issue response Team chose [`response.NotInScope`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** HI! I felt that it does not quality as `NotInScope` as the UG explicitly says that it supports the feature, but did not work in reality. This is unlike the criteria of NotInScope bugs. Furthermore, your rationale for placing it in NotInScope seems to argue against the original bug instead of mine. I felt that the issue of duplicate emails can be solved using your planned enhancements, but not the extra spaces between names. There was no mention that it is less important in v1.4/will be supported next time.  Thank you :)

---

## :question: Issue type Team chose [`type.FeatureFlaw`] Originally [`type.FunctionalityBug`] - [ ] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** [replace this with your explanation]

---