Schedule add command doesn't allow for duplicated schedule names

[marcus-ny]

Description: as stated in topic.

Steps to reproduce: 1.schedule add h/aaa t/12/01/2022 0223 d/here n/Gerald 2.schedule add h/aaa t/2/2/2024 0800 d/not here n/Irene

Expected behaviour: Command should be executed as the same schedule title can be used for multiple events

Actual behaviour: Command fails even though the schedules are with different people and at different times.

[soc-pe-bot]

Team's Response

Since this app is catered to social workers we see that it might be rare for them to have the same appointment headings. Moreover, since they are aware that unique headings are required they can create simple workarounds like adding a number to their appointment, eg: meet alex1 and meet alex2, therefore this seems like not a huge issue, thus we recommend reducing the severity to Low.

The 'Original' Bug

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

Schedule restrictive naming validation

Details

We are not allowed to add schedules of the same title, however, it is common for us to have multiple same appointments at a different time, for e.g I visit the dermatologist every 3 months, but I can only have 1 Visit Dermatologist schedule for tomorrow and not in 3 months time because they are the same event

Steps to Reproduce

1. schedule add h/Visit Dermatologist t/5/14/2024 0930 d/Discuss project details n/John Doe
2. schedule add h/Visit Dermatologist t/9/14/2024 0930 d/Discuss project details n/John Doe (Error here)

---

_{[original: nus-cs2103-AY2324S2/pe-interim#3668] [original labels: severity.Medium type.FeatureFlaw]}

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

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

Since this app is catered to social workers we see that it might be rare for them to have the same appointment headings. Moreover, since they are aware that unique headings are required they can create simple workarounds like adding a number to their appointment, eg: meet alex1 and meet alex2, therefore this seems like not a huge issue, thus we recommend reducing the severity to Low.

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

---

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

---