You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
By changing the Expiry Date of the CPF Policy, the Premium is also deleted. This is an issue as an agent may only need to change one field, but in turn needs to retype all the fields again. This does not support efficiency. Additionally, this flaw could lead to loss of important information if the agent does not realise that by editing a field, he could erase all previous information.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We think this is a good enhancement, but we also did not mention that the behaviour would keep the present details of the policy. So we deem it as not in scope.
Items for the Tester to Verify
❓ Issue response
Team chose [response.NotInScope]
I disagree
Reason for disagreement: It is listed that the team considers this issue as a duplicate of the issue "Should include clause that it writes over all fields in the policy even if the optional field is not stated to be changed #8", which they have deemed to be a functionality bug with medium severity. Therefore, this issue which accurately describes how it is a functionality bug should remain as such.
Additionally, this issue remains as a functionality bug due to the fact that it is not mentioned in the UG when feature edit is mentioned or DG in test cases or planned enhancements. There is nowhere that states that to retain information wanted about the policy it has to be retyped in with the 'policy' command.
Command: policy 9 pi/1 po/CPF Policy ed/03-03-2025
By changing the Expiry Date of the CPF Policy, the Premium is also deleted. This is an issue as an agent may only need to change one field, but in turn needs to retype all the fields again. This does not support efficiency. Additionally, this flaw could lead to loss of important information if the agent does not realise that by editing a field, he could erase all previous information.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: