nus-pe-script
commented
1 year ago Team's Response
No details provided by team.
The 'Original' Bug
[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]
Feature Flaw - Cannot differentiate between uppercase and lowercase in name
Steps to recreate:
- Normal command: `add n/CS2103T t/Lecture
- Erroneous command:
add n/cs2103t t/Lecture
Both should be treated as the same but are considered different:
[original: nus-cs2103-AY2223S2/pe-interim#4386] [original labels: severity.Medium type.FeatureFlaw]
Their Response to the 'Original' Bug
[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]
Thanks for the suggestion. We agree that this check could have been implemented. However, we think that this is likely to only cause a minor inconvenience and would likely only happen in rare scenarios. Hence, we have appointed a severity of low.
Thanks again for the feedback.
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`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** By definition, a severity.Medium bug refers to a flaw that causes occasional inconvenience to some users but they can continue to use the product. Let's address the terms "occasional" and "inconvenience". "Inconvenience": The application will allow me to accidentally create a duplicate module should I forget to use the exact same casing as the original for each and every letter. This causes me inconvenience in that I will have to edit/delete the module to continue using the application as per normal. "Occasional": This also means that I will have to remember the exact casing of each letter of each module code I have entered so as to not make this mistake. Of course one can argue that this problem can be fixed simply by a user standardising the casing of all the module codes entered, but that should be the onus of the developer and not the user. Hence I can see this bug occurring quite occasionally. As the bug fulfils the criteria for a severity.Medium bug, I believe it should be a medium and not a low.
The application rejects when i try to create duplicate modules which is great. However, I can create duplicate modules simply by changing the casing of the description string. As a user, I now have to be wary of the casing I use every time I edit or add a new module as I am at risk of creating duplicate modules. This causes occasional inconvenience to me.