nus-pe-bot
commented
3 years ago Team's Response
This is a feature to allow for separation of appointment objects and patient objects, to allow for a future feature of exporting the calendar into an external application.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: In terms of implementation, there are ways to allow the calendar to be exported to an external application even when the appointment and patient objects are associated. This does not excuse the feature flaw of users being forced to update patients and appointments separately. As each appointment only takes one patient which must be from the patient list, in the majority of use cases, users would update the appointment and patient at the same time. Forcing them to remember to update both every time is a waste of time, and causes inconveniences to users. Hence, it is still a bug and should not have been rejected.
:question: Issue severity
Team chose [severity.VeryLow]
Originally [severity.Medium]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: This bug is not purely cosmetic. It is a feature flaw which affects usage of features that users would use often. It definitely causes occasional inconvenience to some users and hence should be Medium and not VeryLow.
It does not make sense for appointments to have to be edited separately when the patient that is in the appointment is edited. It may cause scheduling/medical errors due to forgetting to update. It also doubles the work done by the user.