soc-se-bot
commented
5 months ago [IMPORTANT!: Please do not edit or reply to this comment using the GitHub UI. You can respond to it using CATcher during the next phase of the PE]
Team's Response
No details provided by team.
The 'Original' Bug
[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]
When each person is assigned with same task and you mark it as done, it is marked as done for everyone assigned.
Context
Let's say there is a task Clean house that is assigned to Alex and Betsy. Let's say that in this scenario, each of them has to clean their own houses.
When one marks the task clean house, it is marked as done from the task's viewpoint. However, what if Alex finished the task but Betsy did not ?
This results in 2 possible restrictions:
A task can only be assigned to multiple people if it is the SAME TASK, eg both Alex and Betsy and cleaning the same house here.
If you want Alex and Betsy to clean different houses, you have to create 2 tasks for that, hard as have to create many tasks
Why this severity:
Medium as this feature is core to the app, and this confusion and restriction can greatly hinder the usage of this app. To be honest, personally this feature would deter me from using it and I would give this bug a high, but I feel my standards for productivity apps are usually too high, so this is fine
[original: nus-cs2103-AY2324S2/pe-interim#3568] [original labels: type.FunctionalityBug severity.Medium]
Their Response to the 'Original' Bug
[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]
This is not a functionality bug. In our context, if a task is assigned to multiple people, it implies that the task is shared among the people assigned the task, so for the task to be done, it suffices that one of these people do it. This design is especially useful for keeping track of team-based tasks, e.g. set up Git repository, typically exhibiting the following characteristics:
- No one in the team is obliged to do the task.
- Someone in the team has to do the task, after which the task is considered done.
Based on our feature design, the behaviour you described is intended, therefore there is no functionality bug.
Currently, it is impossible to create duplicates of the same task and assign each of them to different people (because our app detects duplicate tasks). Certainly, this feature is good-to-have, therefore we recognise that there is a feature flaw. However, since the app specialises in keeping track of team-based tasks, we find it less important to rectify this flaw, as the app already does what it is advertised to be able to do. This flaw is therefore of low severity and out of scope.
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 reason]
## :question: Issue response Team chose [`response.NotInScope`] - [ ] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** [replace this with your reason]
## :question: Issue type Team chose [`type.FeatureFlaw`] Originally [`type.FunctionalityBug`] - [ ] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** [replace this with your reason]
## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.Low`] Originally [`severity.Medium`] - [ ] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** [replace this with your reason]
Context
Let's say there is a task Clean house that is assigned to Alex and Betsy. Let's say that in this scenario, each of them has to clean their own houses.
When one unmarks the task clean house, it is unmarked as not done from the task's viewpoint. However, what if Alex finished the task but Betsy did not ?
This results in 2 possible restrictions:
A task can only be assigned to multiple people if it is the SAME TASK, eg both Alex and Betsy and cleaning the same house here.
If you want Alex and Betsy to clean different houses, you have to create 2 tasks for that, hard as have to create many tasks
Why this severity:
Medium as this feature is core to the app, and this confusion and restriction can greatly hinder the usage of this app. To be honest, personally this feature would deter me from using it and I would give this bug a high, but I feel my standards for productivity apps are usually too high, so medium is okay.