Team's Response

The UG very clearly states that "no duplicates allowed." so we're unfortunately rejecting this.

Items for the Tester to Verify

❓ Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: Even if the UG clearly states that no duplicates are allowed, I believe that it is still better to make the application more defensive against such invalid inputs by rejecting them/throwing a warning message to the user, rather than just allowing the program to accept the input or potentially exhibit different behaviours when faced with different types of invalid inputs (sometimes accepting, sometimes rejecting?).

In addition, it is also stated in the PE guide that deviation to testing from the UG is allowed.

Hence I believe that the app not explicitly rejecting this invalid input (despite what is stated in the UG) is still considered a bug.

❓ Issue severity

Team chose [severity.VeryLow]
Originally [severity.Medium]

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: This is not merely a cosmetic bug as it has to do with the usage of the product (and how it deals with invalid inputs like the one above). However, I will say that the severity can be low as it doesn't cause the program to crash/too much inconvenience. It is probably also unlikely to happen often since it is stated in the UG that no duplicates are allowed, so users are probably unlikely to key in duplicates.

from pe.