search

migfoo02 / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Phrasing not clear for restriction #10

Open migfoo02 opened 1 year ago

migfoo02 commented 1 year ago

Screenshot 2023-11-17 at 5.13.25 PM.png

Restrictions for eedit is not clear on what the 'positive integer' in this sentence refers to - quantity? index?

nus-se-bot commented 1 year ago

Team's Response

Same root issue, since material and roles are done together

The 'Original' Bug

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

Phrasing not clear for restriction - role

Note from the teaching team: This bug was reported during the Part II (Evaluating Documents) stage of the PE. You may reject this bug if it is not related to the quality of documentation.

Screenshot 2023-11-17 at 5.14.44 PM.png

Similar to bug Phrasing not clear for restriction #10 but for role.

[original: nus-cs2103-AY2324S1/pe-interim#4818] [original labels: severity.Low type.DocumentationBug]

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

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

We have already addressed this format and given examples of the correct format in the ecreate section above.

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)

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

## :question: Issue response Team chose [`response.NotInScope`] - [ ] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** [replace this with your explanation]