Finalise PPP for Wei Jie #194
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #194 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 68.35% 68.35%
Complexity 562 562
=========================================
Files 93 93
Lines 1833 1833
Branches 218 218
=========================================
Hits 1253 1253
Misses 499 499
Partials 81 81 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was really thinking of us adding one more section as difficulties faced, especially emphasising on how we were a three man team and like the different unique difficulties we faced doing this project. After all, our problems that we have are likely extremely different compared to a 5 man team.
Also, I am not going to request changes or what ya >< Its up to you to do these changes, after all this your individual component HAHA
docs/team/weijie96.md
Outdated
| * Highlights: | ||
| This enhancement affects existing commands (such as `ListCommand` and `AddCommand`), and commands to be added in future (such as `FindCommand`). | ||
| It required an in-depth analysis of design alternatives. | ||
| The implementation too was challenging as it required changes to existing commands. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a suggestion, maybe you can elaborate on how is it challenging, or highlight one or two cases that were really difficult for you. Or you can edit the DG, then link it there also.
docs/team/weijie96.md
Outdated
| * Highlights: **Coming Soon** | ||
| * What it does: It allows the user to add active clients into the archive. The opposite can be done as well; archived clients can be made active again. | ||
| To support the archiving feature, users can also view the archive, as well as to switch back to view the active clients. | ||
| * Justification: This feature improves the product significantly because a user can add clients which are not currently relevant to the user into the archive. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For this, I think it may be better if you differentiate between insurance agent and client. You used user a few times, it might be confusing, besides linking it back to the target audience would help to solidify this case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would make the change, but actually our DG and UG references "user" most of the time; but for PPP I'll update
| * PRs reviewed (examples with non-trivial review comments): | ||
| [\#50](https://github.com/AY2021S1-CS2103-T16-2/tp/pull/50), [\#97](https://github.com/AY2021S1-CS2103-T16-2/tp/pull/97), [\#124](https://github.com/AY2021S1-CS2103-T16-2/tp/pull/124) | ||
| * Maintained the issue tracker. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would say you are a really solid code quality checker. Anyways I would suggest like we meet on Monday and go through our good points (or bad) in person, since it is much easier to like see others pros and cons instead of writing it yourself.
docs/team/weijie96.md
Outdated
| * What it does: **Coming Soon** | ||
| * Justification: **Coming Soon** | ||
| * Highlights: **Coming Soon** | ||
| * What it does: It allows the user to add active clients into the archive. The opposite can be done as well; archived clients can be made active again. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use the feature instead of it. (Just minor thing)
docs/team/weijie96.md
Outdated
| An initial detailed proposal was suggested to save the archive in a separate `.json` file, using appropriate additional classes and methods. | ||
| However, this would be very time-consuming as care needs to be taken to ensure that the implementation of the reading and saving of the 2 different storages, and updating of the models are correct. | ||
| Given the tight timeline and limitations of a 3-person team, the current implementation of storing the active and archived clients in the same file was decided instead. | ||
| More details of the analysis can be found in the Developer Guide. |
Close #192