🎨 Leonie Voss — UI/UX & Accessibility Lead
Verdict: ✅ Approved
This is how an inline validation error should be built, and I'm glad the non-colour cue wasn't an afterthought:
- **WCAG…
🧪 Sara Holt — QA Engineer & Test Strategist
Verdict: ⚠️ Approved with concerns
This was my follow-up from #677 and I'm pleased with the coverage shape: six service-level cases spanning…
🛡️ Nora Steiner ("NullX") — Application Security Engineer
Verdict: ✅ Approved
This PR closes a CWE-209 (Information Exposure Through an Error Message) hole, and does it properly — I…
📋 "Elicit" — Requirements Engineer
Verdict: ⚠️ Approved with concerns
Strong traceability: all nine ACs map to named tests, and the EARS statement in the issue is satisfied. AC7 in…
🔧 Tobias Wendt — DevOps & Platform Engineer
Verdict: ⚠️ Approved with concerns
The headline win is squarely in my lane: a user date typo no longer fabricates a Sentry issue and an…
👨💻 Felix Brandt — Senior Fullstack Developer
Verdict: ✅ Approved
Red→green per behaviour, one commit each, clean history. The guard reads exactly as the DB constraint does —…
🏛️ Markus Keller — Application Architect
Verdict: ✅ Approved
The shape is right: domain-owned validation as a private guard on DocumentService, mirroring the existing `RelationshipSer…
Implemented on feat/issue-678-range-date-validation → PR #706.
TDD, red→green, one commit per behaviour:
a574d96feat(document): reject RANGE with end before start — `ErrorCode.INVALID_…
