Why Teams Rebuild Code But Relearn the Same Lessons

Most code doesn’t last.
But the reasoning behind it should.

Good code review captures intent,
why something exists,
what problem it was meant to solve,
and what tradeoffs were accepted at the time.

When that context is shared, teams move with confidence.
When it’s missing, teams repeat the same debates again and again.

Review isn’t about judging the change.
It’s about preserving understanding.

Curious to hear from you : What context do you wish more reviews made explicit?