nus-se-bot
commented
4 months ago Team's Response
hey there! thanks for bringing this up. This was the simplest method we could think of. The app supports adding online image addresses too, so im not sure what you are recommending would be entirely suitable. That said, it is a CLI app, and what you suggested can at times be more complex as well. Thanks for the feedback anyways!
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: The response does not address the issue provided.
The app supports adding online image addresses too, so im not sure what you are recommending would be entirely suitable.
The issue identified is the adding of profile pictures only on the local machine, so the point above is irrelevant. Using of online addresses is also not a reasonable substitute, as users cannot be expected to upload images online just so they can be added as profile pictures on the application.
That said, it is a CLI app, and what you suggested can at times be more complex as well.
I do not currently see how my suggestion is more complex.
For the sake of clarity, my design suggestion is:
- create a new folder in the same directory as the application (e.g.
images) - instruct users to add images they wish to use to that folder
- users can then use
pp/NAME_OF_IMAGE_TO_USE]to use that image
The current implementation of the CodeConnectis much more complex to use (the example URI provided has 187 characters, which is definitely not CLI friendly). During the phase of testing, I was not able to get this function (set local images as profile pictures) to work at all due to this issue. Users also should not be expected to de-nest their application solely to bypass this issue.
## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.Low`] Originally [`severity.Medium`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** No details were provided for the downgrade of severity to `low`. > severity.Medium : A flaw that causes occasional inconvenience to some users, but they can continue to use the product. `Medium` seems suitable as this flaw affects all users using this application in nested directories, which is likely to happen (**at least 5-10%** of the user base) I would argue this bug is heavier than a `Medium` as it causes **more than an inconvenience** to users, but it does not yet reach the level of `severity.High`, hence Medium was used.
For the add command, the user is required to key in the full directory of the image.
This is extremely annoying and very prone to errors, especially if the image is nested deeply in multiple directories resulting in the directory name being very long.
a different way of implementing could be to have an additional folder within the same directory as the jar file, and allow users to add images to that folder. The user can then refer to the images in the application by name.