Technical TODO
My hands-on validation tour showed that verifier output is inconsistent and noisy:
- formatter/fixer tools leak raw banners and progress;
- concurrent tool output can interleave;
- machine formats can lose useful source locations;
- JUnit can represent warnings as failures even when they do not gate the CLI.
This makes validation harder to understand and gives the new project dev Validation experience an inconsistent foundation.
Related: #1544
Acceptance criteria
- Raw tool banners/progress no longer leak into final verifier output.
- The same finding keeps the same severity and source location across formats.
- JUnit preserves warning/error semantics instead of turning non-gating warnings into failures.
- Machine-readable output remains clean and usable in CI.
- Existing
--format values continue to work.
Out of scope
- New validation rules or fixes
- CLI-wide output normalization outside verifier commands
Technical TODO
My hands-on validation tour showed that verifier output is inconsistent and noisy:
This makes validation harder to understand and gives the new
project devValidation experience an inconsistent foundation.Related: #1544
Acceptance criteria
--formatvalues continue to work.Out of scope