@ngocsangairvds/vsaf 5.1.5 → 5.1.7

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/implement/gate/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,104 @@
+## Verification Gate
+
+⛔ **NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE.**
+
+Before printing Phase Exit, you MUST pass ALL checks below. For each check: **run the command → read the full output → verify the claim matches the output.** Do NOT trust memory, do NOT trust previous runs, do NOT say "should pass."
+
+| # | Check | Command to Run | Evidence Required | ❌ NOT Acceptable |
+|---|-------|---------------|-------------------|-------------------|
+| 1 | Build compiles | `mvn compile` / `npm run build` / equivalent | `BUILD SUCCESS` or `0 errors` in output | "It compiled earlier" |
+| 2 | All tests pass | `npm test` / `mvn test` / equivalent | `X passed, 0 failed` in output | "Tests should still pass" |
+| 3 | Regression test passes | Run specific test by name | Test name + PASS in output | "I wrote the test so it passes" |
+| 4 | No new SonarQube issues | Check output from Step 4 | 0 blockers, 0 critical, 0 vulns | "Code looks clean" |
+| 5 | GitNexus impact clean | Check output from Step 6 | Blast radius matches analysis | "Fix is minimal so it's fine" |
+| 6 | Scope boundary held | `git diff --stat` | Changed files ⊆ files listed in analysis | "I only changed what was needed" |
+
+**Red flags — if you catch yourself thinking any of these, STOP and run the command:**
+- "It should work" → Run it and prove it
+- "I'm confident" → Confidence ≠ evidence
+- "I already checked" → Check again with fresh output
+- "It's a small change so it's safe" → Small changes break big systems
+- "The test passed during TDD" → TDD was minutes ago; verify NOW
+
+**Procedure:**
+1. Run checks 1-6 sequentially
+2. For each: paste the **actual command output** (or key lines) into `03-impl-log.md` under a `## Verification Evidence` section
+3. If ANY check fails → fix → re-run ALL checks (not just the failed one)
+4. Only after ALL 6 checks show fresh passing evidence → proceed to Phase Exit
+
+## Output
+
+Write file: `.vsaf/docs/hotfixes/{bug-id}/03-impl-log.md`
+
+```markdown
+# Implementation Log: {bug-id}
+
+## Branch
+`hotfix/{bug-id}`
+
+## TDD Cycles
+
+### FR-001: {title}
+- RED: {test file}:{test name} — FAILED ✓
+- GREEN: {changed files} — PASSED ✓
+- REFACTOR: {what was cleaned}
+
+### FR-002: {title} (if applicable)
+...
+
+## Files Changed
+| File | Change type | Lines |
+|------|-------------|-------|
+| {file} | Modified / Added | +{n} -{m} |
+
+## Test Results
+- New tests: {count}
+- Regression test: {test name} — PASS
+- Full suite: {total} tests, all PASS
+
+## SonarQube
+- Issues: 0
+- Vulnerabilities: 0
+- Duplication: {n}%
+
+## Build
+- Compile: PASS
+- Full test suite: PASS
+
+## Verification Evidence
+
+| # | Check | Result | Evidence |
+|---|-------|--------|----------|
+| 1 | Build compiles | ✅ PASS | `{actual build output line}` |
+| 2 | All tests pass | ✅ PASS | `{X} passed, 0 failed` |
+| 3 | Regression test | ✅ PASS | `{test name} — PASSED` |
+| 4 | SonarQube clean | ✅ PASS | 0 blocker, 0 critical, 0 vuln |
+| 5 | Impact clean | ✅ PASS | Blast radius = {files}, matches analysis |
+| 6 | Scope held | ✅ PASS | `git diff --stat`: {n} files changed, all within scope |
+```
+
+## Phase Exit Protocol
+
+Print PHASE REPORT:
+- Bug: {bug-id}
+- Status: IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETED
+- Branch: `hotfix/{bug-id}`
+- Tests: {new} new, {total} total — all PASS
+- Files changed: {count}
+- Output: `.vsaf/docs/hotfixes/{bug-id}/03-impl-log.md`
+- Next step: `/sdlc-hotfix-ship`
+
+Update `.vsaf/docs/STATUS.md`.
+
+> Artifacts saved. If the session is interrupted, open a new session and run the next phase — data is safe.
+
+## Rules
+
+- ⛔ Do NOT write code without a failing test first (TDD)
+- ⛔ Do NOT modify `graphify-out/` or `.gitnexus/`
+- ⛔ Do NOT exceed scope boundary defined in PRD
+- ⛔ Do NOT use subagent-driven development — hotfixes are sequential, focused
+- Code MUST compile — hard gate, no exceptions
+- Full test suite MUST pass — no regressions allowed
+- If fix fails 3 times → STOP, escalate to user
+- If scope drift detected → STOP, go back to PRD

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/implement/impact/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-implement-impact
+description: "Hotfix Implement 6/6 — impact verification"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix Implement 6/6 — impact verification
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/implement/impact/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+### Step 6: Impact Verification
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-IMPL] [6/6] Impact verification via GitNexus... ⏳
+```
+
+Use GitNexus `impact` — verify the fix did not break anything outside blast radius.
+
+If unexpected impact detected → evaluate:
+- Within scope boundary → OK, note in impl log
+- Outside scope boundary → STOP, escalate to user
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-IMPL] [6/6] Impact verification... ✅
+```

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/implement/sonar/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-implement-sonar
+description: "Hotfix Implement 4/6 — SonarQube self-check"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix Implement 4/6 — SonarQube self-check
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/implement/sonar/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+### Step 4: SonarQube Self-Check
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-IMPL] [4/6] SonarQube quality check... ⏳
+```
+
+Apply DURING Step 3 (not after). After the fix is complete, final sweep.
+
+> **Standard (single source of truth):** **`.claude/skills/_shared/sdlc/sonar-viettel/quality-gate.md`** — full gate, 357-rule parameters, and the importable `sonar-viettel-profile.xml` / `sonar-viettel-gate.json`. Phase 4 (`/sdlc-hotfix-review`) re-checks the same file. A hotfix applies the gate's **New Code** conditions on changed files.
+
+| Metric | Threshold |
+|--------|-----------|
+| Issues / Blocker / Critical / Major | = 0 |
+| Code Smells (new) | = 0 — stricter than the gate's ≤20 **by design**: a surgical 1–3 line fix has no excuse to add a smell, and `/sdlc-hotfix-review` rejects any new smell |
+| Vulnerabilities | = 0 |
+| Security Hotspots Reviewed | = 100% |
+| Duplicated Lines (new) | ≤ 45% |
+| Maintainability / Reliability / Security Rating | ≥ A |
+
+**Honour the `sonar-viettel` parametrised rules in the changed code** — S107 (params), S3776 (complexity), S1192 (literals), S2068/S2077 (secrets/injection), S100/S101/S115 (naming). **Thresholds are authoritative in the profile XML** — derive them via the snippet in the shared `quality-gate.md`, do not hard-code numbers.
+
+- If project has SonarQube → import the profile + gate from the shared folder, then run `sonar-scanner` incremental
+- If not → Claude self-reviews changed files against the shared `quality-gate.md`
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-IMPL] [4/6] SonarQube quality check... ✅
+```

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/implement/tdd/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-implement-tdd
+description: "Hotfix Implement 3/6 — TDD cycle"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix Implement 3/6 — TDD cycle
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/implement/tdd/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+### Step 3: TDD Cycle — `/tdd` Methodology
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-IMPL] [3/6] TDD cycle — RED → GREEN → REFACTOR... ⏳
+```
+
+Use `/tdd` methodology — behavior-based, vertical slice:
+
+**For each FR in the PRD:**
+
+1. **RED — Write failing test FIRST**
+   - Test the BEHAVIOR described in the acceptance criteria
+   - Test the PUBLIC INTERFACE, not internals
+   - Include the regression test: reproduce the original bug → MUST FAIL before fix
+   - Run test → confirm it FAILS (red)
+   - ⚠️ If test passes without code changes → the test is wrong or the bug is already fixed
+
+2. **GREEN — Write MINIMAL code to pass**
+   - Change ONLY what is needed to make the test pass
+   - Stay within the scope boundary from PRD
+   - Apply SonarQube rules while writing (see below)
+   - Run test → confirm it PASSES (green)
+
+3. **REFACTOR — Clean without changing behavior**
+   - Remove duplication introduced by the fix
+   - Improve naming if needed
+   - Run ALL tests → still green
+
+**Repeat for each FR.** Typically 1-3 cycles for a hotfix.
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-IMPL] [3/6] TDD cycle complete ✅
+```

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/implement/verify/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-implement-verify
+description: "Hotfix Implement 5/6 — build and test verification"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix Implement 5/6 — build and test verification
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/implement/verify/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+### Step 5: Build & Test Verification
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-IMPL] [5/6] Build & test verification... ⏳
+```
+
+**MANDATORY — hard gate:**
+
+1. **Compile**: Build entire project → 0 errors
+   - Java: `mvn compile` / `gradle build`
+   - Node: `npm run build` / `tsc --noEmit`
+   - Angular: `ng build`
+   - Go: `go build ./...`
+   - FAIL → fix immediately
+
+2. **Full test suite**: Run ALL tests (not just new ones)
+   - `npm test` / `mvn test` / equivalent
+   - ALL tests MUST pass — no regressions
+   - FAIL → use `/diagnose` to find the issue
+
+3. **Regression test confirmation**: The specific test from Step 3 RED phase → now PASSES
+
+⚠️ DO NOT exit if build fails or tests fail. This is a hard gate.
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-IMPL] [5/6] Build & test verification... ✅
+```

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/prd/entry/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-prd-entry
+description: "Hotfix PRD 1/4 — check input artifacts"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix PRD 1/4 — check input artifacts
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/prd/entry/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+## Phase Entry Protocol
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-PRD] [1/4] Checking input artifacts... ⏳
+```
+
+1. Input: `.vsaf/docs/hotfixes/{bug-id}/01-analysis.md`
+2. Verify file exists:
+   - Does not exist → Stop: "Analysis not found. Run `/sdlc-hotfix-analyze` first."
+3. Read the analysis file — extract:
+   - Root cause (file:line)
+   - Blast radius
+   - Fix strategy (proposed in analyze phase)
+   - Affected files
+4. Read `.vsaf/docs/STATUS.md`
+5. Read `CONTEXT.md`
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-PRD] [1/4] Checking input artifacts... ✅
+```

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/prd/gate/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-prd-gate
+description: "Hotfix PRD — gate and rules"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix PRD — gate and rules
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/prd/gate/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+## Gate: {PENDING / APPROVED by {name} on {date}}
+```
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-PRD] [4/4] Writing hotfix PRD... ✅
+```
+
+## Gate
+
+Human must approve the PRD. Write `## Gate: APPROVED` at the end of the file.
+Do NOT proceed to implementation without the Gate marker.
+
+## Phase Exit Protocol
+
+Print PHASE REPORT:
+- Bug: {bug-id}
+- Status: PRD COMPLETED
+- FRs: {count} functional requirements
+- Output: `.vsaf/docs/hotfixes/{bug-id}/02-prd.md`
+- Next step: `/sdlc-hotfix-implement`
+
+Update `.vsaf/docs/STATUS.md`.
+
+> Artifacts saved. If the session is interrupted, open a new session and run the next phase — data is safe.
+
+## Rules
+
+- ⛔ Do NOT start a new grill session — analysis already has grill results
+- ⛔ Do NOT modify `graphify-out/` or `.gitnexus/`
+- ⛔ Do NOT add enhancements — hotfix scope only
+- Scope MUST be minimal — fix root cause, add regression test, nothing more
+- Every FR MUST be directly traceable to the root cause or blast radius

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/prd/requirements/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-prd-requirements
+description: "Hotfix PRD 2/4 — define fix requirements"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix PRD 2/4 — define fix requirements
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/prd/requirements/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+### Step 2: Define Fix Requirements
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-PRD] [2/4] Defining fix requirements from analysis... ⏳
+```
+
+Based on the analysis (NOT a new grill session — that already happened), define:
+
+1. **Fix Goal** — one sentence: what the fix achieves
+2. **Functional Requirements** — FR-001, FR-002... (typically 1-3 for a hotfix)
+   - Each FR traces to the root cause or blast radius item
+3. **Acceptance Criteria** — Given/When/Then for each FR
+   - MUST include a regression test criterion: "Given the fix is applied, When {original reproduction steps}, Then {expected behavior}"
+4. **Scope Boundary** — explicitly state what is OUT of scope (no refactoring, no enhancements)
+5. **Non-Functional Requirements** — only if relevant (performance regression, security)
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-PRD] [2/4] Defining fix requirements... ✅
+```

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/prd/validate/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-prd-validate
+description: "Hotfix PRD 3/4 — validate and risk check"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix PRD 3/4 — validate and risk check
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/prd/validate/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+### Step 3: Validate + Risk Check
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-PRD] [3/4] Validating PRD... ⏳
+```
+
+Use `/bmad-validate-prd` — validate:
+- Every FR is testable
+- Acceptance criteria are unambiguous
+- Scope is minimal (hotfix, not enhancement)
+- Fix addresses root cause, not just symptom
+
+If FAIL → fix inline, re-validate.
+
+Use GitNexus `impact` — confirm blast radius from analysis is still accurate.
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-PRD] [3/4] Validating PRD... ✅
+```

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/prd/write/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-prd-write
+description: "Hotfix PRD 4/4 — write PRD"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix PRD 4/4 — write PRD
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/prd/write/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+### Step 4: Write PRD
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-PRD] [4/4] Writing hotfix PRD... ⏳
+```
+
+Write file: `.vsaf/docs/hotfixes/{bug-id}/02-prd.md`
+
+```markdown
+# Hotfix PRD: {bug-id}
+
+## Fix Goal
+{one sentence}
+
+## Source
+- Analysis: `01-analysis.md`
+- Root cause: {file:line — summary}
+
+## Functional Requirements
+
+### FR-001: {title}
+{description}
+
+**Acceptance Criteria:**
+- Given {context}, When {action}, Then {expected result}
+
+### FR-002: {title} (if needed)
+...
+
+## Non-Functional Requirements
+{NFR-001 if applicable, otherwise "N/A — no NFR impact for this fix"}
+
+## Scope Boundary
+**In scope:** {what will change}
+**Out of scope:** {what will NOT change — no refactoring, no enhancements}
+
+## Blast Radius (confirmed)
+{from GitNexus impact — files that may be affected}

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/review/entry/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-review-entry
+description: "Hotfix Review 1/4 — load context"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix Review 1/4 — load context
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/review/entry/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+## Phase Entry Protocol
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-REVIEW] [1/4] Loading context... ⏳
+```
+
+1. Read `.vsaf/docs/hotfixes/{bug-id}/01-analysis.md` — understand what was supposed to change
+2. Read `CONTEXT.md`
+3. Identify all files changed in the GREEN phase (use git diff or read the phase report)
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-REVIEW] [1/4] Loading context... ✅
+```

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/review/gate/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-review-gate
+description: "Hotfix Review — gate and rules"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix Review — gate and rules
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/review/gate/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+## Gate
+
+Write `## Gate: APPROVED` or `## Gate: CHANGES_REQUESTED` with reasons.
+
+If CHANGES_REQUESTED:
+- List specific issues with triage: MUST FIX / SHOULD FIX / NOTED
+- Do NOT proceed to ship until all MUST FIX items are resolved
+
+## Output
+
+Write file: `.vsaf/docs/hotfixes/{bug-id}/02-review.md`
+
+```markdown
+# Hotfix Review: {bug-id}
+
+## Minimality Check
+{minimality check results}
+
+## Test Quality Check
+{test quality check results}
+
+## Blast Radius
+{blast radius confirmation — matches/exceeds analysis}
+
+## SonarQube
+{quality gate results on changed files}
+
+## Conclusion
+{overall assessment}
+
+## Gate: {APPROVED / CHANGES_REQUESTED}
+{reasons if changes requested}
+```
+
+## Phase Exit Protocol
+
+Print PHASE REPORT:
+- Bug: {bug-id}
+- Status: REVIEW COMPLETED
+- Gate: {APPROVED / CHANGES_REQUESTED}
+- Output: `.vsaf/docs/hotfixes/{bug-id}/02-review.md`
+- Next step: `/sdlc-ship` (if approved)
+
+Update `.vsaf/docs/STATUS.md`.
+
+## Rules
+
+- ⛔ Do NOT modify code — review only
+- ⛔ Do NOT modify `graphify-out/` or `.gitnexus/`
+- A hotfix review is FAST but NOT sloppy — every check matters
+- If the fix touches more files than the analysis predicted, escalate to human

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/review/impact/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-review-impact
+description: "Hotfix Review 4/4 — impact and quality gate"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix Review 4/4 — impact and quality gate
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/review/impact/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+### Step 4: Impact Check + SonarQube
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-REVIEW] [4/4] Impact check + quality gate... ⏳
+```
+
+1. Use GitNexus `detect_changes` + `impact` — confirm blast radius matches the analysis
+2. If blast radius is LARGER than analysis predicted → flag for human review
+3. SonarQube rules on changed files only:
+
+| Metric | Threshold |
+|--------|-----------|
+| Issues (Blocker) | 0 |
+| Issues (Critical) | 0 |
+| Security Hotspots | 0 |
+| New code smells | 0 |
+
+> **Standard (single source of truth):** **`.claude/skills/_shared/sdlc/sonar-viettel/quality-gate.md`** — full gate + 357-rule parameters + importable `sonar-viettel-profile.xml` / `sonar-viettel-gate.json`. Same file Phase 3 (`/sdlc-hotfix-implement`) coded against. If SonarQube is present, scan changed files against the `sonar-viettel` profile + gate; otherwise re-check manually. `New code smells = 0` is intentionally stricter than the gate's ≤20 for surgical fixes.
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-REVIEW] [4/4] Impact check + quality gate... ✅
+```

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/review/minimality/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-review-minimality
+description: "Hotfix Review 2/4 — minimality verification"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix Review 2/4 — minimality verification
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/review/minimality/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+### Step 2: Minimality Verification
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-REVIEW] [2/4] Verifying fix is minimal... ⏳
+```
+
+Check:
+- [ ] Only files identified in the analysis were changed
+- [ ] No unnecessary refactoring included
+- [ ] No formatting-only changes on untouched code
+- [ ] No unrelated fixes bundled in
+- [ ] Diff size is proportional to the bug (a 1-line bug should not need 50 lines of changes)
+
+If any check fails → flag as CHANGES_REQUESTED with specific reason.
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-REVIEW] [2/4] Verifying fix is minimal... ✅
+```

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/review/test-quality/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-review-test-quality
+description: "Hotfix Review 3/4 — test quality check"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix Review 3/4 — test quality check
+
+@include(step.md)

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/review/test-quality/step.md

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+### Step 3: Test Quality Check
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-REVIEW] [3/4] Verifying test quality... ⏳
+```
+
+Read the reproduction test and verify:
+- [ ] Test targets the specific bug (not a generic happy-path test)
+- [ ] Test would FAIL without the fix (it's not trivially always-passing)
+- [ ] Test exercises the exact code path from the root cause analysis
+- [ ] Test has a descriptive name referencing the bug
+- [ ] Test follows project conventions
+
+```
+[HOTFIX-REVIEW] [3/4] Verifying test quality... ✅
+```

package/skills/sdlc/hotfix/ship/commit-pr/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+name: sdlc-hotfix-ship-commit-pr
+description: "Hotfix Ship 4/5 — commit push PR"
+version: 1.0.0
+author: "@ngocsangairvds/vsaf"
+---
+
+# Hotfix Ship 4/5 — commit push PR
+
+@include(step.md)