nus-pe-bot
commented
2 years ago Team's Response
As stated in the user guide, the birthday validation is not in scope of v1.4.
The 'Original' Bug
[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]
The birthday format needs to be specified
step 1: add n/John1 Doe b/abcefgh p/98765432 e/johnd@example.com a/John street, block 123, #01-01
There should be some mechanism in place to prevent this, at least some message alerting the user, even you have indicated in the UG.
[original: nus-tic4002-AY2122s2/pe-interim#96] [original labels: severity.Low type.FunctionalityBug]
Their Response to the 'Original' Bug
[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]
As stated in the user guide, date validation is not in scope of v1.4.
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)
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: Details of the issues raised are different. One is for date format while this is pertaining to the birthday itself. Validation is different.
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.NotInScope]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: With the introduction of birthday as a parameter, it doesn't make sense if validation rules are created in the future version or release. It should be released together imo.
:question: Issue type
Team chose [type.FunctionalityBug]
Originally [type.FeatureFlaw]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: It is raised as a feature flaw because I am aware that the documentation mentioned that date validation will be implemented in the future.
:question: Issue severity
Team chose [severity.VeryLow]
Originally [severity.Low]
- [ ] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]
User can add a future date as birthday