P3. Self-review of PR #175, and a pre-existing pattern rather than something
that PR introduced.
The Discussion class documents exactly where issue links belong:
External thread links (GitHub issues, forum posts) are cited via the
evidence block, not a separate slot.
Every discussion in the corpus instead names issues in prose — "#91", "#65",
"deferred from #118". None uses evidence. So nothing can enumerate which
discussions relate to which issue without parsing free text, and a reader gets
no link.
Fix
Add an evidence entry with the issue URL alongside the prose mention, at least
on discussions that name one. Low value individually; worth doing as a sweep if
the discussion count grows.
Not fixed in #175 — flagged so the convention is recorded rather than silently
diverged from.
P3. Self-review of PR #175, and a pre-existing pattern rather than something
that PR introduced.
The
Discussionclass documents exactly where issue links belong:Every discussion in the corpus instead names issues in prose — "#91", "#65",
"deferred from #118". None uses
evidence. So nothing can enumerate whichdiscussions relate to which issue without parsing free text, and a reader gets
no link.
Fix
Add an
evidenceentry with the issue URL alongside the prose mention, at leaston discussions that name one. Low value individually; worth doing as a sweep if
the discussion count grows.
Not fixed in #175 — flagged so the convention is recorded rather than silently
diverged from.