Overwhelming number of user stories/features assigned to v1.0 and little for v2.0

[ngkaiwen123]

Perhaps I may have been mistaken, but it seems as though the team is rushing to complete most of the features in v1.0? It does not seem likely that only three features are assigned to v2.0?

v1.0

v2.0

[soc-pe-bot]

Team's Response

As a group we decided to start early and complete most of our features in v1.0 as we have other module deadlines that clashes with v2.0 submission. For v2.0, we decided to add minimal features and focus on squashing bugs for PE dry run

Items for the Tester to Verify

❓ Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: This "bug" was reported based on seeing the extract below.

Project should be done "iteratively and incrementally" as stated by this. It does not make sense as to how so many features can be implemented in one sitting and then have little work done for the second iteration.

If the group argued that they did this because of "other module deadlines that clashes with v2.0 submission", it is not a valid justification as most of the students taking CS2113 this semester are CEG students, myself included, and we too take the same modules with tight deadlines. Perhaps this aspect of grading is not for me to judge, but even from a neutral standpoint it does not make logical sense and also confusing as to how implementation can be so lop-sided to just one version and lack any value adding features for the next version.

If this was allowed, I am sure most groups would have their projects done by v1.0 and have little to no value adding features for v2.0, as we too have tight deadlines for other modules we have to settle.

---