What I was missing was structure and enforcement: severity, expiration, ownership, and the ability to fail CI if something critical is still open. That is, I believe, a way to make them truly actionable.
How do you usually keep important followups?
Docs drift. Examples in README.md stop matching the implementation. CI usually doesn’t notice.I built doksnet, a small Rust CLI that lets you link a documentation section to a code snippet and verify that both sides stay in sync using Blake3 hashes.You define mappings like:• README.md:15-25• src/lib.rs:40-65doksnet stores the ranges + their hashes in a compact .doks file. doksnet test...
I got tired of TODOs, temporary hacks, and refactors that never get addressed. In most repos I work on:- TODOs are scattered across files/apps/messages - “Critical” fixes don’t actually block people from collecting debt - PR comments or tickets aren’t enough actionableSo I built codereport, a CLI that stores structured follow-ups in the repo itself (.codereports/). Each report tracks:- file +...