soc-pe-bot
commented
5 months ago Team's Response
It is neater this way with the break-line done this way. On the module website, it is stated that break-lines can be added to increase the readability, and we would like to argue that having it is neater in this format.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.NotInScope]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: The team has not provided reasons for why it would be NotInScope. In the response, the team states that it is not a bug and that it is done intentionally as "it is neater in this format", however, the team does not reject it.
I would also like to argue that the team claims for it to be "neater" in order to avoid it being categorized as a bug. The reason being, there is enough space after the description of the usage of 'add' to include the example output in the same page as the size of the example output is small enough. Images of this has been attached.
The above is one page. The next image is the example output.
## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.VeryLow`] Originally [`severity.Low`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** The team has not given a reason for why the severity is VeryLow and not Low
There is an almost one page gap between the the content of "Adding a student: add" in the DG and the example usage.
This hinders the flow of reader considerably as the reader does gets confused by thinking that it could be the end of the UG. Hence a severity of low is given.