Public report — dotnet-templates, published 4 Aug 2026.
Concrete security findings (CVE IDs, secret matches, dependency versions) are hidden in this version;
ask the repo owner for the full report.
118findings with an exact file:lineof 153 — the remainder are repo-wide signals (a dimension-level measurement, not a single line); open any file:line and verify
46/104dimensions across the health lenses775 LoC · 2 projects — wide & deep
Executive summary
Read through the Template lens: this is a template / kata / sample / demo — code meant to be read or copied, not operated. The ship-it and operate-it dimensions (CI/CD, observability, ADRs, architecture docs, deployment security) are N/A, and the colour bands on what remains are relaxed to what an example needs. Code correctness stays near-strict; the score is absolute and comparable across repos.
jet/dotnet-templates is in good overall health (64%), but at least one category below sits in Adequate-or-worse territory — most items are improvements, and the weakest category contains work to schedule, not shelve.
It is strongest in Domain Modelling (100%) — the domain model is expressive and well-guarded. Readiness (95%) is solid too.
The area that most needs attention is Maturity (60%) — onboarding is slow — key decisions and the architecture aren't written down, so contributors have to reverse-engineer the intent. Code Health (63%) is the next concern — changes there are slower and more error-prone.
Leadership focus, highest impact first: Record significant decisions one document per decision (Architecture documentation); Reconcile the README with reality (Documentation accuracy); README to the 2 of 2 project(s) that lack one (Documentation (README)).
For scale: Hobby (~775 production lines); rebuilding it from scratch would take roughly ~0.1 person-years (~1 engineer). Approximate, ±~30%.
It builds on a genuinely strong Domain Modelling foundation (100%); the priorities above are the highest-leverage way to bring the rest up to that level.
How the score is built — each lens's share of the headlineWidth is the lens's weight in the worst-heaviest fold (the weakest area pulls hardest); colour is that lens's own band. A lens fixes the score in proportion to its width.
No single dominant problem — the weakest areas are close, so progress on any of them moves the score.
Code composition — where the lines go
Business logic 7%Plumbing 34%Tests 59%
New since the last scan (100+)
101 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-07-29) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required. Showing the first 100; the full set is in the report.
A full-fidelity diff against the previous run's complete recorded findings — line-move tolerant: a finding that only shifted line counts as unchanged, only genuinely new titles/files surface here.
How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain Standard (×1.2) — service/app, domain model × a 0.9× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30% · size measured directly from source. Indicative only — most sensitive to the hourly rate and the domain tier (both tunable in config).
Top priorities
The highest-leverage moves; the full ranked list is in the Roadmap below.
1
Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree with `NNNN-title.md` names is the most discoverable form).
Reconcile the README with reality: README advertises Docker containerisation, but no Dockerfile/compose file exists; README advertises a microservices architecture, but the repo is a single project with no service manifests.
Of everything flagged, the best return on effort is: Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree with `NNNN-title.md` names is the most discoverable form). The rest can wait behind it.
Evidence: priority ranking: top of 5 ranked by impact/effort
→ Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree with `NNNN-title.md` names is the most discoverable form).
Architecture — module dependency graph
Project dependencies, layered top-to-bottom; arrows show direction. Any dashed red edge points upward or sideways — a layering smell or cycle. A clean layered graph has none.
Architecture — module dependency matrix
37 modules, 31 dependencies — 1 dependency cycle, shown as the red cell(s) above the diagonal. Rows and columns are the same modules, ordered so that a module only depends on ones above it. A cell means the row depends on the column, and its number is how many type pairs create that dependency. Read one thing: is anything above the diagonal? A mark there is a dependency cycle. (A cycle is all this shows — an unusual but cycle-free dependency sits below the diagonal like any other.)
At a glance — Code Health · 63% · Adequate · gated by X5
Findings mapped to OWASP categories; the specific CVEs/secrets are in the Security dimension cards below and findings.md (redacted only on the public version of this report).
OWASP category
Findings
Severity
A06:2021 — Vulnerable & Outdated Components
6
High / Critical
Roadmap
Begin by establishing a formal architecture decision record in a dedicated directory to capture key design choices and their consequences. Next, align the repository's documentation with the actual codebase by correcting the README to accurately reflect the project structure and removing false claims about Docker and microservices. Then, ensure every project has a comprehensive README to improve discoverability. Finally, improve code quality by implementing cancellation tokens in all asynchronous methods and enabling nullable reference types to eliminate warnings.
Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.
Do this
Helps
Effort
Dimension
Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree with `NNNN-title.md` names is the most discoverable form).
Reconcile the README with reality: README advertises Docker containerisation, but no Dockerfile/compose file exists; README advertises a microservices architecture, but the repo is a single project with no service manifests.
Add security response headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them.
God Classes: FileTooLong: propulsion-sync/Program.fs
propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs
7.4
Near-clean
Code Duplication: Duplicated block (15 lines × 2)
feed-consumer/Program.fs
7.4
Near-clean
Code Duplication: Duplicated block (12 lines × 5)
propulsion-reactor/Todo.fs
7.4
Near-clean
Code Duplication: Duplicated block (12 lines × 2)
propulsion-pruner/Program.fs
7.4
Near-clean
Code Duplication: Duplicated block (10 lines × 2)
propulsion-consumer/Program.fs
7.4
Near-clean
Code Duplication: Duplicated block (9 lines × 3)
equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs
7.4
Near-clean
Code Duplication: Duplicated block (9 lines × 2)
periodic-ingester/Program.fs
7.4
Near-clean
Code Duplication: Duplicated block (8 lines × 4)
equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs
7.4
Near-clean
Code Duplication: Duplicated block (7 lines × 2)
propulsion-reactor/Program.fs
7.4
Near-clean
Code Duplication: Duplicated block (5 lines × 2)
Methodology & how to trust this report
Watchdog is a deep, periodic assessment — run each sprint, monthly, or quarterly, taking the time to go wider and deeper than a quick check and surfacing in one coherent report what you'd otherwise piece together from a dozen separate tools. It scores deterministically: the same commit yields the same score, every run. 43 of 46 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 3 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.6 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.
Every figure here is one of three kinds, and we label which: ✓ Measured — a deterministic fact (LoC, complexity, coverage); ~ Modeled — an estimate from a stated model (cost, effort, value-at-risk), always a range with its assumptions, never a precise fact; ◐ Advisory — an LLM prose judgement. We never present a modelled estimate as if it were measured. Perfect or absent scores carry their provenance too (ADR-0011): ✓ Tool-verified means the property itself was measured across the surface; ○ Nothing flagged means the probes came back clean — a claim bounded by what a repository can show; ⊘ Not evidenced means a working control (a tested restore, an automated rollback) showed no positive evidence — absence of evidence is not evidence of a control, so it's excluded from the score rather than awarded a spurious 10; ◐ Sampled · advisory marks an LLM verdict over a bounded sample — advisory, never a deterministic measurement.
What we checked — 46 dimensions across the health lenses
Each chip is a dimension scored from real signals across architecture, testing, dependencies, security & compliance, documentation, git-history and code quality — in one coherent pass. A surface report typically covers a handful.
How to trust any code-health report — three questions
Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 118 of 153 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.
This report answers yes to all three. That's the bar to hold any assessment to.
Tools & methods
The actual versions used this run (captured at analysis time) — re-run on the same commit for the identical score.
Method
Backs
Version
Evaluator
Roslyn static analysis
Complexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering
What ran differently this time — a tool absent, degraded, or that fell back to an estimate. Named openly, not folded silently into the scores. A degraded run also records its exact cause in diagnostics.md.
D19 Documentation Quality — LLM provider failed — The model provider returned an unusable result, so this LLM-assisted dimension fell back to a measurement gap (confidence 0) rather than a penalty. Re-run with a reachable provider to score it.
Repo exclusion declarations (.gitattributes linguist-generated/vendored, .editorconfig generated_code): none declared — every source file was scored.
Limitations & what we did not check
Watchdog assesses the repository exactly as committed, and only the repository. By design it does not reach outside the source tree: the live cloud account, the running CI/CD pipeline, the host's branch-protection and approval rules, the production configuration, or a restore actually exercised against a backup are all out of scope. That boundary is a feature, not a gap — a repo-relative, deterministic scan re-runs identically on any commit and every finding opens at a real file and line, where a live audit can neither be reproduced nor traced. The visible consequence is that controls which leave no in-repo evidence are reported as "not evidenced" and excluded from the score rather than awarded a number a static scan cannot justify.
Per-dimension blind spots
For each dimension that was measured, what a static, repo-only scan structurally cannot see — the honest edge of the measurement, not a failure of it.
D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity (jscpd) — it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
D24 Comment Value: Comment value (WHY vs WHAT) is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it is advisory and cannot weigh a comment against the precise code change it was written to explain.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D27 Navigability: Indirection/navigability is structural — it measures hops to follow a call, not whether that indirection buys real flexibility or just ceremony.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and the advisory database — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
DM6 Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary: Infrastructure reached through a hand-rolled wrapper, a domain-named facade, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-infra type and isn't seen; the body scan is symbol resolution over syntax, not full dataflow. A clean result means "no resolved infra reference in a domain body", not a proof of purity.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.
The LLM boundary
LLM-set scores this run (3): D21, D24, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score (documentation, ADR quality, naming, comment value, onboarding) — D25 sets the ADR-conformance fraction over sampled code, D22 judges API accuracy over a sample. These are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.
What it measures: How tangled the control flow is — methods with many branches are hard to test and change.
Method: Cyclomatic complexity per method (1 + decision points), computed exhaustively across production source; test projects separated by convention. Deterministic.
0 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15. A further 3 method(s) were over the threshold but excluded as flat dispatchers (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), the largest being EsSourceParameters.Argu.IArgParserTemplate.get_Usage at 22 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score.
What it measures: How hard the code is for a person to follow, beyond raw branching.
Method: Cognitive complexity per method (Sonar-style nesting-penalized score), computed exhaustively over production code, excluding test projects. Deterministic.
0 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d2_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D3 · God Classes9.6 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Over-large classes that try to do too much ("god classes").
Method: God-class detection by line and method-count thresholds per logical type (partial classes unified), filtered for generated code and registration/contract false positives. Deterministic.
What it measures: Copy-pasted code that should be shared instead.
Method: Code duplication via token-stream sliding windows with type-aware normalization (locals masked, type names preserved), density-scored per KLoC of production code. Deterministic.
+ 25 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 15 Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with Program.fs (6), Infrastructure.fs (5), SourceArgs.fs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (15 warning-level).
Resolve the 14 Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with SourceConfig.fs (4), SourceArgs.fs (2), Storage.fs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (14 warning-level).
Resolve the 13 Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with Program.fs (5), SourceArgs.fs (2), Types.fs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (13 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d4_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D5 · Coupling6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether volatile projects sit underneath others that depend on them (so their churn ripples upward), and whether project dependencies form cycles. A widely-depended-on but stable shared/kernel project is healthy, not penalised.
Method: Dependency cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, plus Martin instability (afferent/efferent) per project. Exhaustive over the reference graph, deterministic.
Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: afferent/efferent coupling + cycles computed over every production type — the population is all types, not a name convention.
Resolve the 1 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Coupling in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d5_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether dependencies are current, secure, and not bloated.
Method: Manifest scan via dotnet list package across all projects; worst-signal-per-package deduction (saturating for vulnerabilities, capped-linear for deprecation/outdated) per KLoC. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Resolve the 1 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Dependency Hygiene in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d12_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether any secrets (keys, tokens, passwords) have leaked into the code.
Method: In-process native secret scanner (entropy plus signature patterns) across all tracked files; no external tool. A clean result is a measured 10, not no-data zero. Deterministic.
What it measures: Whether the licenses of third-party packages are compatible with your policy.
Method: Third-party package licenses resolved from declared package metadata and checked against the configured policy (allow/deny/copyleft). Deterministic; clean = no incompatible license found at metadata depth.
What it measures: Files that change often and are also complex — the riskiest hotspots.
Method: Per production file churn times cyclomatic complexity over a rolling window, computed from git and Roslyn/JS/Razor analysis. Exhaustive, deterministic per commit date.
What it measures: Acknowledged debt left in the code — TODOs, dead code, suppressed warnings.
Method: Roslyn syntactic debt markers (suppressions/TODO/FIXME/HACK/empty-catch/commented-code/Obsolete) plus SymbolFinder dead-code analysis; weighted-debt-per-KLoC density deducted 2.0x per unit. Deterministic, exhaustive.
What it measures: Whether names — types, methods, variables — are clear and consistent.
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic random symbol sample (fixed size, not exhaustive), with disclosed confidence band. Advisory, sampled.
0 naming inconsistencies across 200 sampled symbols.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D24 · Comment Value / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory
What it measures: Whether comments are worth it — explaining WHY (valuable) rather than WHAT (redundant).
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on deterministically sampled inline comments with surrounding code; findings verified back to sampled comments by substring match. Advisory, sampled.
What it measures: How far you must trace to follow a call — low indirection and co-located slices read easier.
Method: Call indirection (interface hops, cross-namespace calls, slice-locality scaled) over a sampled set of method invocations, size-aware baseline. Sampled; confidence discounted by symbol-resolution gaps.
Coverage: Slice locality from the first namespace segments, SAMPLED (≤400 methods) — not exhaustive.
85 % of calls cross a namespace and 2 % go through an interface, but 95 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: small — navigation cost is tolerated.
What it measures: Whether any secrets were ever committed — scanned across the full git history, not just now.
Method: Git-history secret scan via gitleaks detect over full history in an isolated checkout; each match flagged High. Exhaustive; degrades cleanly when tool absent.
What it measures: Real static-analysis (SAST) findings — likely security bugs in the code, any language.
Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep across the repo using the pinned, image-baked p/security-audit + p/owasp-top-ten rulesets (no scan-time registry fetch); severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a full-band severity-weighted score. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades on parse failure.
Coverage: semgrep pattern rules over all files — exhaustive for the rule set, blind to classes of bug without a rule (clean = no rule matched).
What it measures: Whether any dependencies have known published vulnerabilities (CVEs), direct or transitive.
Method: NuGet CVE scan via dotnet list package --vulnerable including transitive; severity tally (Critical/High/Medium/Low) to 0-10 tight normalizer. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades when absent.
What it measures: Whether anyone still has living knowledge of each file, or it has been orphaned — last understood long ago by someone now gone quiet. The sibling of the bus factor: D16 asks who owns it, D34 asks whether anyone still knows it.
Method: File orphaning as total living-knowledge decay below one focused-commit's worth within a year, computed per-file from the D16 decay model. Exhaustive, deterministic over fixed history.
What it measures: Whether files that change together actually belong together — pairs that repeatedly co-change in git history despite having no explicit code dependency, surfacing the hidden/logical coupling (and boundaries in the wrong place) a static scan can't see.
Method: Pairwise co-occurrence over the per-commit file sets in git history (production source only — tests and generated dropped): Degree-of-Coupling = shared ÷ min individual revisions, reported above noise floors (each file ≥10 revisions, ≥5 shared commits, ≥50% strength); sweeping commits excluded. Deterministic over fixed history.
Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling; coupling through a build step, config, or non-source file isn't seen.
What it measures: Whether the repository publishes a coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure policy (SECURITY.md or security.txt) with a reporting contact, so finders know how to report a vulnerability. Presence of a policy file with a contact, not whether the policy is adequate or honoured.
Method: Vulnerability-disclosure policy read deterministically from the repo: a SECURITY.md (root/.github/docs) or .well-known/security.txt / security.txt, regex-checked for a reporting contact (email / URL / mailto). Present + contact → 10; present without a contact → 4; NotApplicable when no policy file exists (it may live off-repo). Detects the policy file's presence + contact, not its adequacy.
A vulnerability-disclosure policy (SECURITY.md) is published with a reporting contact.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d37_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D39 · IL Efficiency10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
Method: IL instruction count per method, read from the BUILT first-party assemblies via Mono.Cecil (the target is compiled on a deep run); scored on the fraction of methods whose emitted IL body exceeds the size threshold. Sees compiler-generated bloat source can't; not-applicable when the target fails to build. Deterministic.
Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified.
Method: Roslyn line-count by code ROLE: every source file classified Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated by namespace + path convention (the shared CodeRoleClassifier), then significant lines summed per role. Deterministic; the advisory score is the business-logic (domain+application) share of production code.
Coverage: Population: ALL source files, each bucketed into ONE of five roles (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated) by namespace + path convention — a file whose layer isn't named in the convention falls to Application (the neutral default), and the split is line-count, not semantic depth or business value.
Other · Architecture — Whether the project-reference graph is acyclic (cycles block independent build/deploy and signal eroding boundaries).
Method: Project reference cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, using the engine shared with D5/D7; cyclic versus acyclic. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Other · Architecture — Whether dependencies point inward (Domain ← Application ← Infrastructure/Web) — the clean-architecture dependency rule, checked across the project graph.
Method: Layer violations by name-segment inference (Domain/Core to Application to Infrastructure/Web) over the project-reference graph. Exhaustive over all projects, deterministic.
Other · Architecture — Whether the codebase has a recognisable, scale-appropriate structure (a named architectural style, or modular enough for its size) rather than being an ad-hoc ball of mud.
Method: Roslyn plus csproj analysis: architecture style detection (DDD, clean, vertical-slice, CQRS) and structure fitness for repo size. Deterministic.
Other · Domain Modelling — Whether aggregates reference each other by identity (id) rather than by direct object reference — the core DDD consistency-boundary rule.
Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): aggregate roots identified by convention; each aggregate field checked for direct references to other aggregates versus id-only. Deterministic, DDD-native.
Coverage: Population: aggregate roots identified by AggregateRoot/IAggregateRoot base/interface NAME convention; reference-by-identity then checked exhaustively within that set — a root not using those names is invisible.
Other · Domain Modelling — Whether entities protect their state (private/init-only setters) instead of exposing public setters that bypass invariants. Softened when a rehydration framework (Marten/EF) is present.
Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): public setters on entities detected; score softened when Marten/EF rehydration frameworks present. Deterministic, framework-aware.
Coverage: Population: entities by convention; encapsulation (setter shape) checked exhaustively within the set.
Other · Domain Modelling — Whether the domain layer stays free of infrastructure dependencies (EF/Marten/HTTP/ASP.NET) — the clean-architecture dependency rule.
Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): domain-layer types scanned for infrastructure usage in member SIGNATURES and inside method/accessor BODIES — resolved calls and object-creations into EF/Marten/HTTP/Mongo/Redis/message-bus types (not just a namespace allowlist). Deterministic, symbol-resolved, exhaustive over domain-layer bodies, DDD-native.
Coverage: Domain layer identified by NAMESPACE heuristic; infrastructure then resolved by symbol in member SIGNATURES and method/accessor BODIES — rename the layer and the check evaporates.
Other · Domain Modelling — Whether clusters of primitives that travel together (a missing value object) are extracted — a low-weight suggestion, LLM-confirmed when configured.
Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): primitive parameter clusters recurring three or more times across signatures extracted, then confirmed by language model when configured. Advisory, low-weight.
Other · Code Health — Unreviewed-generation residue: shipped members still throwing NotImplementedException, and placeholder string literals left in non-test, non-generated code. Scored as a quality signature, never as a claim about authorship.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: NotImplementedException throws and placeholder string literals in non-test, non-generated shipped code. Deterministic, code-shape signature.
Other · Code Health — Unfinished work detected by code SHAPE, not keywords: members that only throw a "not implemented" exception, methods that take inputs and return a constant, async methods that never await, dead `if (false)` / `#if false` branches, and skeleton types most of whose members are holes. A real, objective slice of technical debt.
A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers). — Startup.cs:112
What to do
Clear the softer debt: remove commented-out code and dead branches, re-enable or delete skipped tests, and replace blanket warning suppressions with targeted ones.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo and its projects have a README, and whether it's substantive and current.
Method: Filesystem scan: README presence, word count, and headings for depth; git history for staleness. Exhaustive across root and project dirs, deterministic.
What to do
Add a README to the 2 of 2 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether key decisions (ADRs) and the high-level shape (C4/diagrams) are written down.
Method: Filesystem scan: ADR folder/naming conventions or content, plus Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/architecture.md discovery. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no `NNNN-title.md` documents and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
What to do
Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree with `NNNN-title.md` names is the most discoverable form).
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the README actually describes the code that exists (LLM-judged, advisory).
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature: README accuracy versus actual projects, within a disclosed tolerance. Advisory, not a measured number.
README advertises Docker containerisation, but no Dockerfile/compose file exists
README advertises a microservices architecture, but the repo is a single project with no service manifests
What to do
Reconcile the README with reality: README advertises Docker containerisation, but no Dockerfile/compose file exists; README advertises a microservices architecture, but the repo is a single project with no service manifests.
Readiness · Performance — Whether the library protects its performance with benchmarks — a benchmark suite, allocation/memory measurement, and (ideally) a CI gate. Presence is credited as a bonus, never a deduction.
Method: Repo + source scan: BenchmarkDotNet referenced (csproj/source), [Benchmark]/[MemoryDiagnoser] attribute counts, and a benchmark step in CI — scored as a bonus ladder (absence is neutral, never a deduction). Deterministic, presence detection.
No benchmark suite was found. Where code is performance-sensitive, a benchmark guards against silent regressions — but it's a bonus here, not a deduction.
What to do
Add a benchmarking harness for the hot paths and run it in CI to catch regressions (for .NET, a BenchmarkDotNet project with [MemoryDiagnoser] to track allocations).
Readiness · Performance — Whether the code is written to minimise allocations so it doesn't pressure its host's memory manager — buffer/slice views over copies, object pooling, stack or value-type allocation, and buffer writers. Reward-only: credited where present, never penalised where a simpler style is fine.
Readiness · Performance — Whether asynchronous code keeps its host responsive — a library awaits with ConfigureAwait(false) (so it never captures and stalls the host's context) and avoids sync-over-async blocking (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) that wastes threads and risks deadlock.
Method: Production-source scan: sync-over-async blocking (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) counted everywhere, and — for a library with ≥5 awaits — the share of awaits using ConfigureAwait(false). Deterministic, syntax/text detection.
Other · Security — Transport security, security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order and crypto hygiene (presence, not runtime).
No Content-Security-Policy / X-Frame-Options / X-Content-Type-Options configuration found — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. (−2.0 on this card.)
No UseHttpsRedirection/UseHsts and no reverse-proxy signal — transport security is unverified at the app layer. (−2.0 on this card.)
No ModelState/[ApiController]/FluentValidation signal — inbound payloads reach handlers unvalidated. (−2.0 on this card.)
What to do
Add security response headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them.
Enforce HTTPS at the app layer (UseHttpsRedirection / UseHsts) — only skip this if a reverse proxy demonstrably terminates TLS.
Validate inbound models (ModelState/[ApiController]/FluentValidation) to reduce injection and bad-data risk.
Other · Code Health — Whether the code avoids sync-over-async (deadlock-prone blocking on tasks) and async void.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: async methods scanned for .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() and async-void outside event handlers. Deterministic, hard fact per invocation.
Other · Code Health — Whether async methods accept a CancellationToken so work can be cancelled (adoption curve).
Method: Roslyn scan: every async method (excluding framework-fixed overrides/Blazor handlers) checked for CancellationToken parameter presence. Deterministic, adoption percentage.
Only 0/5 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.
No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started. (×4) — TodosController.cs:39, TodosController.cs:43, TodosController.cs:51, …
No CancellationToken parameter — the body observes an ambient token instead (a field or a context object), so the work does stop on cancellation, but a caller cannot cancel this call independently of the owner that created that token. — CosmosContext.cs:36
What to do
Thread a CancellationToken through async methods so work stops promptly on cancellation.
Other · Code Health — Whether exceptions are handled rather than silently swallowed or rethrown with lost stack traces.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every catch clause counted; empty catches and bare rethrows flagged. Population is all catch clauses, not estimated. Deterministic, hard fact.
Other · Code Health — Whether log calls use message templates (queryable) rather than interpolated strings.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every log call-site counted; interpolated-string first-argument violations flagged. Population is all log calls, not estimated. Deterministic.
Other · Code Health — Whether nullable reference types are enabled and not undermined by heavy `!` suppression.
Method: Roslyn compiler-options scan: NullableContextOptions per project; null-forgiving (!) suppression density per 1k syntax nodes. Deterministic, adoption plus suppression penalty.
0/2 NRT-eligible project(s) enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> (projects targeting a pre-C#-8 framework are excluded — NRTs aren't available there). NRTs catch a whole class of null-deref bugs at compile time.
What to do
Enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> across all projects and resolve warnings rather than suppressing with `!`.
Do you agree with this assessment?
Reference — by lens
The score is the rank-weighted fold of these lenses (worst-heaviest), each including its meta-dimensions; a lens with a Critical contributor is capped at Fair (its band reads "gated by …") and is never the strongest area however high its average.
Not included — 58 check(s) not relevant to this codebase
These checks had nothing to measure here (no tests, no git history, the codebase is small, or the architecture style doesn't apply), so they're omitted above rather than scored low.
AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AX1 Captive dependencies — no DI registrations detected
AX2 Stateful singletons — no singleton implementations detected
AX6 Interface segregation — no public interfaces
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
C2 Access Controls — This is a dotnet-new template — authorization is deferred to the application you build from it. Add [Authorize]/policies (or imperative guards) when you wire up real users; until then there are no real endpoints to protect.
C3 Audit Trail — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
D10 Test Quality — ~1122 lines of test source are present (.fs) but the test-quality collector reads C# only, so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included
D16 Bus Factor — dormant codebase — no living knowledge left to concentrate
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a C#/VB .NET solution, but this repository's production source is mostly .fs, which the C#/VB workspace does not load — the projects that loaded are an immaterial minority, so solution shape was not assessed for this repository. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's reach, not a verdict about this repository.
D19 Documentation Quality — LLM evaluation failed
D20 ADR Quality — N/A — this repo declares itself a template / kata / sample / demo; a formal ADR log is deferred to a real application built from it.
D22 Internal API Consistency — No exposed public API
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — At only 11k LoC across two projects the codebase is small and single-purpose, so explicit bounded contexts are not needed.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation); nothing to scan.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No PII/GDPR-handling patterns detected (p/gdpr ruleset) — no data-compliance surface to assess.
D33 JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities — No JS/npm manifest or lockfile found outside build output (package.json, package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); no JS dependencies to scan.
D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — This is a dotnet-new template — it produces no released artifact to attest. Supply-chain provenance, signing and SBOM are deferred to the application you build from it (add SLSA provenance / cosign signing / an SBOM in your app's release pipeline).
D38 OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities — No supported non-.NET dependency lockfile found outside build output (npm package-lock/yarn/pnpm/bun, Go go.mod, Rust Cargo.lock, Maven pom.xml, Gradle lockfiles, Python requirements.txt/poetry.lock/Pipfile.lock/pdm.lock, PHP composer.lock, Ruby Gemfile.lock, Elixir mix.lock, Dart pubspec.lock, Swift Package.resolved); nothing for OSV to scan. A NuGet-only repo stays NotApplicable — .NET CVEs are D30's domain.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4) — Cohesion (LCOM4) is measured over a C#/VB class graph, and this repository's production source is mostly .fs, which this pass does not read, so cohesion was not assessed for this repository. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs and no dependency cycles — architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not measured
D9 Test Distribution — Test source is present (.fs) but the test-pyramid classifier reads C# only, so its unit/integration/BDD/E2E split couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
DM2 Strongly-typed ids — no id-bearing domain types detected — strongly-typed-id adoption not assessable
DM3 Integration-event coupling — no integration events detected — coupling check not applicable
DM4 Rich vs anemic model — no data-bearing entities detected — rich-vs-anemic model not assessable
DM7 Repository granularity — no repository abstraction detected (e.g. uses a document session)
ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this check looks for
ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
ES1 Event Sourcing — applicable but not scored (2 of 3 signals for this style — below the bar we score at): an event-store package (Marten/EventStore); 10 aggregate(s) with Apply/When folds
P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — and nothing was matched here. The coverage check applies to any stack, but the checks for excluded tests, skipped tests and sleep-based synchronisation currently recognise only some ecosystems' test-runner idioms, so on a repository built with another stack the zeros below mean 'not checked', not 'clean'.
P2 Observability — Observability was not assessed: this check reads a source model that does not carry this repository's product — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of a logging idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repo lacks structured logging (it may log through its own ecosystem's logger). This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
P3 Security & performance tooling — This repo declares itself a template / kata / sample / demo — code meant to be read or copied, not operated. SAST, secret/dependency scanning and performance benchmarks are deferred to the application you build from it, so their absence is not a defect here. The dimension reactivates once the repo becomes a real app.
P4 Deployment & Rollback — not evidenced — no deploy/rollback/approval signal in the repo; absence of evidence is not evidence of a manual release
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — no outbound HTTP usage detected
P8 Schema migrations — no EF Core usage detected
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (Cobertura — `dotnet test --collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` with a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference) into the repo working tree before the scan — a CI step is the usual place, since the artefact is commonly gitignored, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Reported, not scored — this card publishes what it found rather than grading it. Its content is the findings and the key metric above.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — Reported, not scored — this card publishes what it found rather than grading it. Its content is the findings and the key metric above.
Appendix A — Findings (grouped)
The findings behind the scores, grouped by severity, then by dimension and kind. The high-severity issues are enumerated in full below; items per group are capped at 25 with any overflow stated explicitly per group, never silently truncated. The complete machine-readable list of every finding (all severities) is the companion findings.md in this report's bundle.
High CVE: Newtonsoft.Json 10.0.2 — Newtonsoft.Json 10.0.2 (transitive) has a High advisory; affects 20 projects — one upgrade fixes all. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
High CVE: System.Net.Http 4.3.0 — System.Net.Http 4.3.0 (transitive) has a High advisory; affects 8 projects — one upgrade fixes all. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
High CVE: System.Text.RegularExpressions 4.3.0 — System.Text.RegularExpressions 4.3.0 (transitive) has a High advisory; affects 8 projects — one upgrade fixes all. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:125— propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:125-129 | propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs:67-71 — `propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs` and `propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 56 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:125` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-projector/Program.fs:55— propulsion-projector/Program.fs:55-59 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:37-41 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs:115— propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs:115-120 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Infrastructure.fs:89-93 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs:115` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:89— propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:89-93 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs:60-64 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 45 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:89` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:148— propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:148-152 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs:96-102 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 45 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:287— propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:287-291 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceArgs.fs:185-189 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/Program.fs:105— propulsion-reactor/Program.fs:105-109 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:67-71 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/Program.fs:118— propulsion-reactor/Program.fs:118-122 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:75-79 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/Program.fs:141— propulsion-reactor/Program.fs:141-145 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:89-93 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-sync/Program.fs:250— propulsion-sync/Program.fs:250-254 | propulsion-sync/Program.fs:343-347 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-sync/Program.fs:263— propulsion-sync/Program.fs:263-267 | propulsion-sync/Program.fs:356-360 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `propulsion-sync/Program.fs:263` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Domain/Shipment.fs:63— equinox-shipping/Domain/Shipment.fs:63-67 | equinox-shipping/Domain/Container.fs:42-46 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory: extract the block into a single shared function in that directory and call it from each site, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs:82— equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs:82-86 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/SourceConfig.fs:55-59 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Infrastructure.fs:90— propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Infrastructure.fs:90-94 | propulsion-indexer/App/Infrastructure.fs:66-72 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `propulsion-indexer/App/Infrastructure.fs:66` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) propulsion-indexer/App/Args.fs:42— propulsion-indexer/App/Args.fs:42-46 | propulsion-indexer/App/Args.fs:89-93 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) equinox-testbed/Storage.fs:6— equinox-testbed/Storage.fs:6-14 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Args.fs:15-21 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:46— propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:46-52 | propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs:98-104 — `propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs` and `propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 56 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) propulsion-projector/SourceConfig.fs:50— propulsion-projector/SourceConfig.fs:50-56 | propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:38-45 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) propulsion-projector/Args.fs:23— propulsion-projector/Args.fs:23-29 | propulsion-reactor/Args.fs:25-31 — `propulsion-projector/Args.fs` and `propulsion-reactor/Args.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:70— propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:70-76 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs:72-78 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 43 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:70` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:87— propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:87-93 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs:78-84 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 43 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:87` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:32— propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:32-38 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Args.fs:125-131 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:279— propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:279-285 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceArgs.fs:177-183 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) equinox-patterns/Domain/Store.fs:31— equinox-patterns/Domain/Store.fs:31-37 | feed-source/Domain/Store.fs:30-36 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/DynamoConnector.fs:3— equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/DynamoConnector.fs:3-9 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor.Integration/DynamoConnector.fs:3-9 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:141— equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:141-147 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:106-112 — before extracting anything, compare `equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs` and `propulsion-hotel/Reactor.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 47 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs:61— equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs:61-67 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/SourceConfig.fs:33-39 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Handler.fs:26— equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Handler.fs:26-32 | propulsion-indexer/Indexer/Indexer.fs:25-31 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) propulsion-hotel/Domain/GuestStay.fs:100— propulsion-hotel/Domain/GuestStay.fs:100-106 | propulsion-hotel/Domain/GroupCheckout.fs:121-127 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory: extract the block into a single shared function in that directory and call it from each site, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) feed-consumer/Types.fs:7— feed-consumer/Types.fs:7-15 | feed-source/Domain/Types.fs:11-19 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:147— propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:147-155 | propulsion-pruner/Program.fs:137-145 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:147` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:184— propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:184-192 | propulsion-pruner/Program.fs:176-185 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:184` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) propulsion-consumer/Program.fs:46— propulsion-consumer/Program.fs:46-54 | propulsion-summary-consumer/Program.fs:83-91 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) propulsion-projector/SourceArgs.fs:88— propulsion-projector/SourceArgs.fs:88-96 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceArgs.fs:70-78 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/TodoSummary.fs:3— propulsion-reactor/TodoSummary.fs:3-11 | propulsion-summary-consumer/TodoSummary.fs:3-11 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/Ingester.fs:66— propulsion-reactor/Ingester.fs:66-74 | propulsion-reactor/Handler.fs:77-85 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory: extract the block into a single shared function in that directory and call it from each site, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `propulsion-reactor/Ingester.fs:66` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:258— propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:258-266 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceArgs.fs:156-165 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) propulsion-summary-consumer/Program.fs:88— propulsion-summary-consumer/Program.fs:88-96 | propulsion-tracking-consumer/Program.fs:84-92 — `propulsion-summary-consumer/Program.fs` and `propulsion-tracking-consumer/Program.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 47 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) equinox-patterns/Domain/Store.fs:14— equinox-patterns/Domain/Store.fs:14-22 | propulsion-hotel/Domain/Store.fs:15-23 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:94— equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:94-104 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:62-70 — before extracting anything, compare `equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs` and `propulsion-hotel/Reactor.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 47 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs:83— equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs:83-91 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Infrastructure.fs:43-53 — before extracting anything, compare `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs` and `propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Infrastructure.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 34 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:93— equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:93-101 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Program.fs:79-87 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) equinox-testbed/Infrastructure.fs:36— equinox-testbed/Infrastructure.fs:36-43 | feed-source/FeedApi/Infrastructure.fs:21-28 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) equinox-testbed/Program.fs:113— equinox-testbed/Program.fs:113-120 | equinox-testbed/Program.fs:181-188 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) propulsion-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:16— propulsion-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:16-23 | propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:33-40 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) propulsion-consumer/Examples.fs:41— propulsion-consumer/Examples.fs:41-48 | propulsion-consumer/Examples.fs:64-71 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) propulsion-pruner/Program.fs:21— propulsion-pruner/Program.fs:21-28 | propulsion-indexer/Indexer/Program.fs:7-16 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) propulsion-pruner/Program.fs:56— propulsion-pruner/Program.fs:56-63 | propulsion-sync/Program.fs:131-138 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/Store.fs:38— propulsion-reactor/Store.fs:38-45 | equinox-web/Domain/Store.fs:53-61 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/Ingester.fs:25— propulsion-reactor/Ingester.fs:25-32 | propulsion-reactor/Handler.fs:29-36 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory: extract the block into a single shared function in that directory and call it from each site, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) propulsion-summary-consumer/TodoSummary.fs:48— propulsion-summary-consumer/TodoSummary.fs:48-55 | propulsion-indexer/Domain/TodoIndex.fs:49-56 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-summary-consumer/TodoSummary.fs` and `propulsion-indexer/Domain/TodoIndex.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 31 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:109— equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:109-116 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:75-82 — before extracting anything, compare `equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs` and `propulsion-hotel/Reactor.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 47 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) periodic-ingester/Program.fs:99— periodic-ingester/Program.fs:99-104 | feed-source/FeedApi/Program.fs:59-64 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) propulsion-projector/Program.fs:188— propulsion-projector/Program.fs:188-193 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:126-131 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:55— propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:55-60 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs:55-60 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 43 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:55` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:60— equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:60-65 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:53-58 — before extracting anything, compare `equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs` and `propulsion-hotel/Reactor.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 47 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs:32— equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs:32-37 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/SourceConfig.fs:21-28 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:43— equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:43-48 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Program.fs:46-51 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:103— equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:103-108 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Program.fs:89-94 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:4— propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:4-15 | propulsion-pruner/Program.fs:4-15 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:15— propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:15-26 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs:16-27 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 43 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/Todo.fs:8— propulsion-reactor/Todo.fs:8-19 | propulsion-indexer/Domain/Todo.fs:6-17 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/Todo.fs:42— propulsion-reactor/Todo.fs:42-53 | equinox-web/Domain/Todo.fs:26-37 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) propulsion-summary-consumer/Store.fs:1— propulsion-summary-consumer/Store.fs:1-12 | propulsion-tracking-consumer/Store.fs:1-12 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) propulsion-summary-consumer/TodoSummary.fs:5— propulsion-summary-consumer/TodoSummary.fs:5-16 | propulsion-indexer/Domain/TodoIndex.fs:5-16 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-summary-consumer/TodoSummary.fs` and `propulsion-indexer/Domain/TodoIndex.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 31 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:8— feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:8-17 | propulsion-sync/Infrastructure.fs:8-18 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) feed-consumer/Program.fs:71— feed-consumer/Program.fs:71-80 | periodic-ingester/Program.fs:83-92 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) propulsion-projector/SourceArgs.fs:49— propulsion-projector/SourceArgs.fs:49-58 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceArgs.fs:32-42 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) propulsion-pruner/Program.fs:71— propulsion-pruner/Program.fs:71-80 | propulsion-sync/Program.fs:145-155 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/Todo.fs:63— propulsion-reactor/Todo.fs:63-72 | propulsion-indexer/Domain/Todo.fs:62-71 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) equinox-web/Domain/Aggregate.fs:47— equinox-web/Domain/Aggregate.fs:47-57 | equinox-web/Domain/Todo.fs:133-142 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory: extract the block into a single shared function in that directory and call it from each site, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 4) equinox-testbed/Store.fs:6— equinox-testbed/Store.fs:6-15 | equinox-web/Domain/Store.fs:6-15 | feed-source/Domain/Store.fs:6-15 | propulsion-hotel/Domain/Store.fs:6-15 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 4 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 4 times.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 4) propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs:81— propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs:81-90 | propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:111-120 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs:69-78 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Infrastructure.fs:29-38 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 49 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 4) propulsion-projector/Args.fs:67— propulsion-projector/Args.fs:67-76 | propulsion-reactor/Args.fs:76-85 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Args.fs:73-82 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceArgs.fs:59-68 — `propulsion-projector/Args.fs` and `propulsion-reactor/Args.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 4) propulsion-reactor/Store.fs:3— propulsion-reactor/Store.fs:3-12 | propulsion-summary-consumer/Store.fs:3-12 | propulsion-tracking-consumer/Store.fs:3-12 | equinox-patterns/Domain/Store.fs:3-12 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 4 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 4 times.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) equinox-testbed/Infrastructure.fs:22— equinox-testbed/Infrastructure.fs:22-30 | feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:15-23 | periodic-ingester/Infrastructure.fs:19-27 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) propulsion-consumer/Program.fs:67— propulsion-consumer/Program.fs:67-75 | propulsion-summary-consumer/Program.fs:109-117 | propulsion-tracking-consumer/Program.fs:109-117 — `propulsion-summary-consumer/Program.fs` and `propulsion-tracking-consumer/Program.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 47 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) propulsion-projector/Args.fs:9— propulsion-projector/Args.fs:9-17 | propulsion-reactor/Args.fs:10-18 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Args.fs:10-18 — `propulsion-projector/Args.fs` and `propulsion-reactor/Args.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) propulsion-projector/Args.fs:35— propulsion-projector/Args.fs:35-43 | propulsion-reactor/Args.fs:45-53 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Args.fs:41-49 — `propulsion-projector/Args.fs` and `propulsion-reactor/Args.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) feed-consumer/Program.fs:92— feed-consumer/Program.fs:92-97 | periodic-ingester/Program.fs:104-109 | propulsion-tracking-consumer/Program.fs:82-87 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) propulsion-projector/Store.fs:30— propulsion-projector/Store.fs:30-35 | propulsion-reactor/Store.fs:36-41 | equinox-web/Domain/Store.fs:51-56 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) propulsion-projector/SourceArgs.fs:66— propulsion-projector/SourceArgs.fs:66-71 | propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:123-128 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceArgs.fs:50-55 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) propulsion-projector/SourceArgs.fs:131— propulsion-projector/SourceArgs.fs:131-136 | propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:203-208 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceArgs.fs:113-118 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:4— propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:4-18 | propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs:4-18 — `propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs` and `propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 56 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs:1— propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs:1-15 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs:1-15 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 49 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:39— equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:39-53 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs:32-46 — before extracting anything, compare `equinox-shipping/Watchdog.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs` and `propulsion-hotel/Reactor.Integration/ReactorFixture.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 47 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:228— feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:228-238 | periodic-ingester/Infrastructure.fs:232-242 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:228` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:79— propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:79-89 | propulsion-pruner/Program.fs:67-77 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:29— propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs:29-39 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs:23-33 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-reactor/SourceConfig.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceConfig.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 43 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) propulsion-consumer/Program.fs:18— propulsion-consumer/Program.fs:18-25 | propulsion-summary-consumer/Program.fs:25-32 | propulsion-tracking-consumer/Program.fs:25-31 — `propulsion-summary-consumer/Program.fs` and `propulsion-tracking-consumer/Program.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 47 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs:92— propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs:92-98 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs:81-87 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Infrastructure.fs:41-47 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 49 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) propulsion-projector/Store.fs:18— propulsion-projector/Store.fs:18-25 | propulsion-reactor/Store.fs:24-30 | equinox-web/Domain/Store.fs:37-45 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) periodic-ingester/Infrastructure.fs:43— periodic-ingester/Infrastructure.fs:43-47 | propulsion-tracking-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:40-44 | feed-source/FeedApi/Infrastructure.fs:31-35 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `periodic-ingester/Infrastructure.fs:43` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) propulsion-projector/Program.fs:141— propulsion-projector/Program.fs:141-145 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:97-101 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Program.fs:83-87 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:123— propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:123-128 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs:81-85 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Infrastructure.fs:41-45 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 45 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
BareSuppressMessage equinox-web-csharp/Domain/ClientId.cs:17— SuppressMessage — the suppression records no reason: either it carries no justification argument at all, or one that states nothing a reader can weigh ("OK", "By design"). A suppression is a decision somebody made, and without the reason the next reader cannot tell a considered exception from an unexamined one, so it is never revisited. Write what makes this site legitimately different — the invariant that holds, the framework contract that forces the shape — or remove the suppression and fix what it hides.
BareSuppressMessage equinox-web-csharp/Domain/Todo.cs:171— SuppressMessage — the suppression records no reason: either it carries no justification argument at all, or one that states nothing a reader can weigh ("OK", "By design"). A suppression is a decision somebody made, and without the reason the next reader cannot tell a considered exception from an unexamined one, so it is never revisited. Write what makes this site legitimately different — the invariant that holds, the framework contract that forces the shape — or remove the suppression and fix what it hides.
Medium CVE: Microsoft.IdentityModel.JsonWebTokens 6.8.0 — Microsoft.IdentityModel.JsonWebTokens 6.8.0 (transitive) has a Medium advisory; affects 2 projects — one upgrade fixes all. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
Medium CVE: System.IdentityModel.Tokens.Jwt 6.8.0 — System.IdentityModel.Tokens.Jwt 6.8.0 (transitive) has a Medium advisory; affects 2 projects — one upgrade fixes all. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:103— feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:103-121 | periodic-ingester/Infrastructure.fs:107-125 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:165— feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:165-183 | periodic-ingester/Infrastructure.fs:169-187 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:165` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) propulsion-projector/Args.fs:45— propulsion-projector/Args.fs:45-55 | propulsion-reactor/Args.fs:55-65 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Args.fs:51-61 — `propulsion-projector/Args.fs` and `propulsion-reactor/Args.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) propulsion-reactor/TodoSummary.fs:32— propulsion-reactor/TodoSummary.fs:32-42 | propulsion-summary-consumer/TodoSummary.fs:32-42 | propulsion-indexer/Domain/TodoIndex.fs:32-42 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-summary-consumer/TodoSummary.fs` and `propulsion-indexer/Domain/TodoIndex.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 31 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 4) periodic-ingester/Program.fs:77— periodic-ingester/Program.fs:77-84 | propulsion-projector/Args.fs:39-46 | propulsion-reactor/Args.fs:49-56 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Args.fs:45-52 — `propulsion-projector/Args.fs` and `propulsion-reactor/Args.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 4) periodic-ingester/Program.fs:127— periodic-ingester/Program.fs:127-134 | propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:170-177 | propulsion-pruner/Program.fs:161-168 | propulsion-indexer/App/Infrastructure.fs:158-165 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 4 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 4 times. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
dormant codebase — no living knowledge left to concentrate — All 91 significant source file(s) were last meaningfully changed so long ago that no living knowledge remains — nothing since has been substantial enough to re-establish ownership (a broad, mechanical sweep that touches many files shallowly does not count, and neither does no activity at all). There is no concentration to measure, so the bus factor is not scored. This is not a clean bill: nobody currently holds working knowledge of this code (see D34 Knowledge Freshness).
LLM evaluation failed — JSON parse error: Expected end of string, but instead reached end of data. Path: $.findings[0].docPath | LineNumber: 0 | BytePositionInLine: 1046.
FileTooLong: propulsion-sync/Program.fs propulsion-sync/Program.fs:0— FileTooLong — 506 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:4— propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:4-17 | propulsion-summary-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:4-17 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) propulsion-projector/Program.fs:3— propulsion-projector/Program.fs:3-22 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Program.fs:3-15 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 5) feed-consumer/Program.fs:3— feed-consumer/Program.fs:3-14 | periodic-ingester/Program.fs:3-14 | propulsion-summary-consumer/Program.fs:3-14 | propulsion-tracking-consumer/Program.fs:3-14 | feed-source/FeedApi/Program.fs:3-14 — `propulsion-summary-consumer/Program.fs` and `propulsion-tracking-consumer/Program.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 47 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) periodic-ingester/Infrastructure.fs:10— periodic-ingester/Infrastructure.fs:10-21 | propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:7-18 | propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs:7-18 — `propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs` and `propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 56 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 6) feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:44— feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:44-54 | periodic-ingester/Infrastructure.fs:48-58 | propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:23-33 | propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs:75-85 | feed-source/FeedApi/Infrastructure.fs:36-46 | propulsion-indexer/App/Infrastructure.fs:17-27 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 6 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 6 times. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `feed-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:44` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 6) propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:90— propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:90-98 | propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs:26-34 | propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:55-63 | propulsion-sync/Infrastructure.fs:58-66 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs:26-34 | propulsion-indexer/App/Infrastructure.fs:78-86 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 49 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:122— propulsion-archiver/Program.fs:122-130 | propulsion-pruner/Program.fs:114-122 | propulsion-summary-consumer/Program.fs:65-73 | propulsion-tracking-consumer/Program.fs:61-69 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 4 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 4 times.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 6) propulsion-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:76— propulsion-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:76-83 | propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs:12-19 | propulsion-reactor/Infrastructure.fs:136-143 | propulsion-summary-consumer/Infrastructure.fs:74-81 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs:12-19 | propulsion-indexer/App/Infrastructure.fs:49-56 — before extracting anything, compare `propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs` and `equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Infrastructure.fs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 49 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 7) propulsion-projector/Args.fs:102— propulsion-projector/Args.fs:102-108 | propulsion-projector/SourceArgs.fs:122-128 | propulsion-reactor/Args.fs:111-117 | propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:194-200 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/Args.fs:108-114 | equinox-shipping/Watchdog/SourceArgs.fs:104-110 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/SourceArgs.fs:56-62 — `propulsion-projector/Args.fs` and `propulsion-reactor/Args.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 4) propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:130— propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:130-136 | propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:217-223 | propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:295-301 | propulsion-reactor/SourceArgs.fs:366-372 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 5) propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:116— propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs:116-121 | propulsion-projector/Infrastructure.fs:52-57 | propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs:58-63 | propulsion-sync/Infrastructure.fs:84-89 | propulsion-indexer/App/Infrastructure.fs:104-109 — `propulsion-archiver/Infrastructure.fs` and `propulsion-pruner/Infrastructure.fs` are the same file name in two sibling directories, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 56 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 4) propulsion-projector/Handler.fs:82— propulsion-projector/Handler.fs:82-87 | propulsion-reactor/Ingester.fs:71-76 | propulsion-reactor/Handler.fs:82-87 | propulsion-hotel/Reactor/Handler.fs:66-71 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 4 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 4 times.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) equinox-patterns/Domain/ListEpoch.fs:72— equinox-patterns/Domain/ListEpoch.fs:72-76 | equinox-patterns/Domain/ListSeries.fs:52-57 | equinox-web/Domain/Aggregate.fs:47-57 | equinox-web/Domain/Todo.fs:133-142 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 4 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 4 times. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Off the main sequence: Domain — Domain: abstractness 0.02, instability 0.00, distance 0.98 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 1 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
Coverage not measured — The test suite couldn't be built/run in-image and no coverage report is committed, so line coverage was not measured — and it is EXCLUDED from the score rather than scored on a LoC-ratio proxy. No coverage collector was found in your CI either, so there is no existing report to hand us: add a coverage collector to your test run and commit (or publish) its Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov output anywhere in the repo, or make the suite runnable in-image, and real coverage will be measured.
Recommendation — 5 finding(s)
D11 · Test Reliability· Test reliability not included · ×1
Test reliability not included — Test source is present (.fs) but the built-in reliability runner does not support this repository's ecosystem, so flakiness couldn't be assessed. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
Split Domain — Generic catch-all name with 349+ LoC and 887 types across 37 namespaces is a sprawling grab-bag. Suggested: by namespace: split the 37 domains into cohesive domain modules
Split Web — Generic catch-all name with 426+ LoC and 887 types across 37 namespaces is a sprawling grab-bag. Suggested: by namespace: split the 37 web modules into focused web libraries
Outdated: Argu — Argu 6.1.4 → 6.2.5 available (referenced by Projector).
Outdated: Equinox.CosmosStore — Equinox.CosmosStore 4.1.0 → 4.1.3 available (referenced by Projector).
Outdated: Equinox.SqlStreamStore.MsSql — Equinox.SqlStreamStore.MsSql 4.1.0 → 4.1.3 available (referenced by Projector).
Outdated: FsCodec.SystemTextJson — FsCodec.SystemTextJson 3.1.0 → 3.1.2 available (referenced by Projector).
Outdated: Serilog.Sinks.Console — Serilog.Sinks.Console 4.0.1 → 6.1.1 available (referenced by Projector).
Outdated: Serilog.Sinks.Async — Serilog.Sinks.Async 1.5.0 → 2.1.0 available (referenced by Sync).
Outdated: Serilog.Sinks.Seq — Serilog.Sinks.Seq 4.0.0 → 9.1.0 available (referenced by Sync).
Outdated: prometheus-net.AspNetCore — prometheus-net.AspNetCore 3.6.0 → 8.2.1 available (referenced by Web).
Outdated: Serilog.AspNetCore — Serilog.AspNetCore 3.2.0 → 10.0.0 available (referenced by Web).
Outdated: Newtonsoft.Json — Newtonsoft.Json 13.0.1 → 13.0.4 available (referenced by Domain).
Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection — Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection 5.0.2 → 10.0.10 available (referenced by Testbed).
Outdated: MinVer — MinVer 6.0.0 → 7.0.0 available (referenced by Equinox.Templates).
Outdated: Propulsion.MemoryStore — Propulsion.MemoryStore 3.0.0 → 3.0.2 available (referenced by Watchdog).
Outdated: FsCheck.Xunit.v3 — FsCheck.Xunit.v3 3.3.2 → 3.3.4 available (referenced by Domain.Tests).
Outdated: Equinox.Core — Equinox.Core 4.1.0 → 4.1.1 available (referenced by Domain).
Outdated: Amazon.Lambda.Core — Amazon.Lambda.Core 2.1.0 → 3.3.0 available (referenced by Watchdog.Lambda).
Outdated: Amazon.Lambda.Serialization.SystemTextJson — Amazon.Lambda.Serialization.SystemTextJson 2.3.0 → 3.0.0 available (referenced by Watchdog.Lambda).
Outdated: Equinox.MessageDb — Equinox.MessageDb 4.1.0 → 4.1.3 available (referenced by Domain).
Outdated: Propulsion.MessageDb — Propulsion.MessageDb 3.0.0 → 3.0.1 available (referenced by Reactor).
Outdated: Propulsion — Propulsion 3.0.0 → 3.0.2 available (referenced by Domain).
D22 · Internal API Consistency· No exposed public API · ×1
No exposed public API — No intentionally-exposed types (IsPackable or .Contracts) to evaluate.
Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail
Every external tool invocation behind a deep-scan dimension — the tool, its captured version, the exact command, how many findings it yielded, and a link to the retained raw output. To reproduce any finding: check out the same commit and run the command shown (repo-relative — never an absolute scratch path). The complete raw scanner output is retained verbatim under artifacts/raw/ (indexed in artifacts/raw/index.json); per-invocation exit codes and wall-clock durations are in sidecar.json — kept out of this table so the rendered report stays byte-identical across runs of the same commit.
trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation); nothing to scan.
trivy: not applicable — No JS/npm manifest or lockfile found outside build output (package.json, package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); no JS dependencies to scan.
provenance: not applicable — This is a dotnet-new template — it produces no released artifact to attest. Supply-chain provenance, signing and SBOM are deferred to the application you build from it (add SLSA provenance / cosign signing / an SBOM in your app's release pipeline).
runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
0
—
Run 019fce79-bc57-71c1-a61b-78049e06596f · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.
Issues: 3 · Warnings: 124 · Recommendations: 5 · Info: 21 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 04-08-2026 @ 20:31 UTC.
Downloadable artifacts
Machine-readable and reproducible from this commit + frozen rubric — drop them straight into a contract appendix, a CRA dossier, or a downstream SCA / VEX tool.