nus-pe-bot
commented
2 years ago Team's Response
This should be a severity low feature flaw, as we did not anticipate for the wrong prefix inside the command. And, this issue has to do with error message, and not the functionality of the command, hence it should be a feature flaw. It should be low severity, as it will not affect all users and is unlikely to affect normal operations of the product.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue type
Team chose [type.FeatureFlaw]
Originally [type.FunctionalityBug]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: Error messages should only be considered feature flaws if they are not specific enough, but are otherwise technically right. In this case, the error message is outright incorrect. Something along the lines of "Incorrect command format" would be expected here. From the relevant section in the textbook:
The third point covers this bug.
:question: Issue severity
Team chose [severity.Low]
Originally [severity.Medium]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: This should be a severity.Medium bug, as even a single mistyped parameter will result in the wrong error message being displayed. The editapplicant command can take in a considerable number of inputs:
Consider the following scenario:
In updating every single possible field, the incorrect error message regarding index is displayed. With so many entries in the command, it can be difficult for the user to determine what went wrong, especially when the error message is pointing them in the opposite direction. This can cause occasional inconveniences to the user, as stated here:
When using the editapplicant command and providing an incorrect prefix (phone/ instead of p/), error message shows "Index provided is invalid" instead.