bmad-method 6.0.0-alpha.11 → 6.0.0-alpha.13

package/src/modules/bmm/docs/workflows-analysis.md

@@ -1,7 +1,5 @@
 # BMM Analysis Workflows (Phase 1)
 
-**Reading Time:** ~7 minutes
-
 ## Overview
 
 Phase 1 (Analysis) workflows are **optional** exploration and discovery tools that help validate ideas, understand markets, and generate strategic context before planning begins.
@@ -14,61 +12,35 @@ Phase 1 (Analysis) workflows are **optional** exploration and discovery tools th
 
 ---
 
-## Phase 1 Analysis Workflow Map
-
-```mermaid
-%%{init: {'theme':'base', 'themeVariables': { 'primaryColor':'#fff','primaryTextColor':'#000','primaryBorderColor':'#000','lineColor':'#000','fontSize':'16px','fontFamily':'arial'}}}%%
-graph TB
-    subgraph Discovery["<b>DISCOVERY & IDEATION (Optional)</b>"]
-        direction LR
-        BrainstormProject["<b>Analyst: brainstorm-project</b><br/>Multi-track solution exploration"]
-        BrainstormGame["<b>Analyst: brainstorm-game</b><br/>Game concept generation"]
-    end
-
-    subgraph Research["<b>RESEARCH & VALIDATION (Optional)</b>"]
-        direction TB
-        ResearchWF["<b>Analyst: research</b><br/>• market (TAM/SAM/SOM)<br/>• technical (framework evaluation)<br/>• competitive (landscape)<br/>• user (personas, JTBD)<br/>• domain (industry analysis)<br/>• deep_prompt (AI research)"]
-    end
-
-    subgraph Strategy["<b>STRATEGIC CAPTURE (Recommended for Greenfield)</b>"]
-        direction LR
-        ProductBrief["<b>Analyst: product-brief</b><br/>Product vision + strategy<br/>(Interactive or YOLO mode)"]
-        GameBrief["<b>Game Designer: game-brief</b><br/>Game vision capture<br/>(Interactive or YOLO mode)"]
-    end
-
-    Discovery -.->|Software| ProductBrief
-    Discovery -.->|Games| GameBrief
-    Discovery -.->|Validate ideas| Research
-    Research -.->|Inform brief| ProductBrief
-    Research -.->|Inform brief| GameBrief
-    ProductBrief --> Phase2["<b>Phase 2: prd workflow</b>"]
-    GameBrief --> Phase2Game["<b>Phase 2: gdd workflow</b>"]
-    Research -.->|Can feed directly| Phase2
-
-    style Discovery fill:#e1f5fe,stroke:#01579b,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
-    style Research fill:#fff9c4,stroke:#f57f17,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
-    style Strategy fill:#f3e5f5,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
-    style Phase2 fill:#c8e6c9,stroke:#2e7d32,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style Phase2Game fill:#c8e6c9,stroke:#2e7d32,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-
-    style BrainstormProject fill:#81d4fa,stroke:#0277bd,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style BrainstormGame fill:#81d4fa,stroke:#0277bd,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style ResearchWF fill:#fff59d,stroke:#f57f17,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style ProductBrief fill:#ce93d8,stroke:#6a1b9a,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style GameBrief fill:#ce93d8,stroke:#6a1b9a,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-```
+## Phase 1 Analysis Workflow Overview
+
+Phase 1 Analysis consists of three categories of optional workflows:
+
+### Discovery & Ideation (Optional)
+
+- **brainstorm-project** - Multi-track solution exploration for software projects
+- **brainstorm-game** - Game concept generation (coming soon)
+
+### Research & Validation (Optional)
+
+- **research** - Market, technical, competitive, user, domain, and AI research
+- **domain-research** - Industry-specific deep dive research
+
+### Strategic Capture (Recommended for Greenfield)
+
+- **product-brief** - Product vision and strategy definition
+
+These workflows feed into Phase 2 (Planning) workflows, particularly the `prd` workflow.
 
 ---
 
 ## Quick Reference
 
-| Workflow               | Agent         | Required    | Purpose                                                        | Output                       |
-| ---------------------- | ------------- | ----------- | -------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------- |
-| **brainstorm-project** | Analyst       | No          | Explore solution approaches and architectures                  | Solution options + rationale |
-| **brainstorm-game**    | Analyst       | No          | Generate game concepts using creative techniques               | Game concepts + evaluation   |
-| **research**           | Analyst       | No          | Multi-type research (market/technical/competitive/user/domain) | Research reports             |
-| **product-brief**      | Analyst       | Recommended | Define product vision and strategy (interactive)               | Product Brief document       |
-| **game-brief**         | Game Designer | Recommended | Capture game vision before GDD (interactive)                   | Game Brief document          |
+| Workflow               | Agent   | Required    | Purpose                                                        | Output                       |
+| ---------------------- | ------- | ----------- | -------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------- |
+| **brainstorm-project** | Analyst | No          | Explore solution approaches and architectures                  | Solution options + rationale |
+| **research**           | Analyst | No          | Multi-type research (market/technical/competitive/user/domain) | Research reports             |
+| **product-brief**      | Analyst | Recommended | Define product vision and strategy (interactive)               | Product Brief document       |
 
 ---
 
@@ -98,37 +70,6 @@ graph TB
 
 ---
 
-### brainstorm-game
-
-**Purpose:** Generate game concepts through systematic creative exploration using five brainstorming techniques.
-
-**Agent:** Analyst
-
-**When to Use:**
-
-- Generating original game concepts
-- Exploring variations on themes
-- Breaking creative blocks
-- Validating game ideas against constraints
-
-**Techniques Used:**
-
-- SCAMPER (systematic modification)
-- Mind Mapping (hierarchical exploration)
-- Lotus Blossom (radial expansion)
-- Six Thinking Hats (multi-perspective)
-- Random Word Association (lateral thinking)
-
-**Key Outputs:**
-
-- Method-specific artifacts (5 separate documents)
-- Consolidated concept document with feasibility
-- Design pillar alignment matrix
-
-**Example:** "Roguelike with psychological themes" → Emotions as characters, inner demons as enemies, therapy sessions as rest points, deck composition affects narrative.
-
----
-
 ### research
 
 **Purpose:** Comprehensive multi-type research system consolidating market, technical, competitive, user, and domain analysis.
@@ -190,42 +131,6 @@ graph TB
 
 ---
 
-### game-brief
-
-**Purpose:** Lightweight interactive brainstorming session capturing game vision before Game Design Document.
-
-**Agent:** Game Designer
-
-**When to Use:**
-
-- Starting new game project
-- Exploring game ideas before committing
-- Pitching concepts to team/stakeholders
-- Validating market fit and feasibility
-
-**Game Brief vs GDD:**
-
-| Aspect       | Game Brief         | GDD                       |
-| ------------ | ------------------ | ------------------------- |
-| Purpose      | Validate concept   | Design for implementation |
-| Detail Level | High-level vision  | Detailed specs            |
-| Format       | Conversational     | Structured                |
-| Output       | Concise vision doc | Comprehensive design      |
-
-**Key Outputs:**
-
-- Game vision (concept, pitch)
-- Target market and positioning
-- Core gameplay pillars
-- Scope and constraints
-- Reference framework
-- Risk assessment
-- Success criteria
-
-**Integration:** Feeds into GDD workflow (Phase 2).
-
----
-
 ## Decision Guide
 
 ### Starting a Software Project
@@ -234,16 +139,10 @@ graph TB
 brainstorm-project (if unclear) → research (market/technical) → product-brief → Phase 2 (prd)
 ```
 
-### Starting a Game Project
-
-```
-brainstorm-game (if generating concepts) → research (market/competitive) → game-brief → Phase 2 (gdd)
-```
-
 ### Validating an Idea
 
 ```
-research (market type) → product-brief or game-brief → Phase 2
+research (market type) → product-brief → Phase 2
 ```
 
 ### Technical Decision Only
@@ -258,6 +157,12 @@ research (technical type) → Use findings in Phase 3 (architecture)
 research (market/competitive type) → product-brief → Phase 2
 ```
 
+### Domain Research for Complex Industries
+
+```
+domain-research → research (compliance/regulatory) → product-brief → Phase 2
+```
+
 ---
 
 ## Integration with Phase 2 (Planning)
@@ -267,8 +172,8 @@ Analysis outputs feed directly into Planning:
 | Analysis Output             | Planning Input             |
 | --------------------------- | -------------------------- |
 | product-brief.md            | **prd** workflow           |
-| game-brief.md               | **gdd** workflow           |
 | market-research.md          | **prd** context            |
+| domain-research.md          | **prd** context            |
 | technical-research.md       | **architecture** (Phase 3) |
 | competitive-intelligence.md | **prd** positioning        |
 
@@ -306,20 +211,11 @@ Use analysis workflows to align stakeholders before committing to detailed plann
 
 ```
 1. brainstorm-project - explore approaches
-2. research (market) - validate viability
+2. research (market/technical/domain) - validate viability
 3. product-brief - capture strategic vision
 4. → Phase 2: prd
 ```
 
-### Greenfield Game (Full Analysis)
-
-```
-1. brainstorm-game - generate concepts
-2. research (competitive) - understand landscape
-3. game-brief - capture vision
-4. → Phase 2: gdd
-```
-
 ### Skip Analysis (Clear Requirements)
 
 ```
@@ -351,10 +247,10 @@ Use analysis workflows to align stakeholders before committing to detailed plann
 A: No! Analysis is entirely optional. Use only workflows that help you think through your problem.
 
 **Q: Which workflow should I start with?**
-A: If unsure, start with `research` (market type) to validate viability, then move to `product-brief` or `game-brief`.
+A: If unsure, start with `research` (market type) to validate viability, then move to `product-brief`.
 
 **Q: Can I skip straight to Planning?**
-A: Yes! If you know what you're building and why, skip Phase 1 entirely and start with Phase 2 (prd/gdd/tech-spec).
+A: Yes! If you know what you're building and why, skip Phase 1 entirely and start with Phase 2 (prd/tech-spec).
 
 **Q: How long should Analysis take?**
 A: Typically hours to 1-2 days. If taking longer, you may be over-analyzing. Move to Planning.
@@ -363,7 +259,7 @@ A: Typically hours to 1-2 days. If taking longer, you may be over-analyzing. Mov
 A: That's the point! Analysis helps you fail fast and pivot before heavy planning investment.
 
 **Q: Should brownfield projects do Analysis?**
-A: Usually no. Start with `document-project` (Phase 0), then skip to Planning (Phase 2).
+A: Usually no. Start with `document-project` (Documentation prerequisite), then skip to Planning (Phase 2).
 
 ---
 

package/src/modules/bmm/docs/workflows-implementation.md

@@ -1,7 +1,5 @@
 # BMM Implementation Workflows (Phase 4)
 
-**Reading Time:** ~8 minutes
-
 ## Overview
 
 Phase 4 (Implementation) workflows manage the iterative sprint-based development cycle using a **story-centric workflow** where each story moves through a defined lifecycle from creation to completion.
@@ -14,117 +12,29 @@ Phase 4 (Implementation) workflows manage the iterative sprint-based development
 
 Phase 4 is the final phase of the BMad Method workflow. To see how implementation fits into the complete methodology:
 
-![BMad Method Workflow - Standard Greenfield](./images/workflow-method-greenfield.svg)
+The BMad Method consists of four phases working in sequence:
 
-_Complete workflow showing Phases 1-4. Phase 4 (Implementation) is the rightmost column, showing the iterative epic and story cycles detailed below._
+1. **Phase 1 (Analysis)** - Optional exploration and discovery workflows
+2. **Phase 2 (Planning)** - Required requirements definition using scale-adaptive system
+3. **Phase 3 (Solutioning)** - Technical architecture and design decisions
+4. **Phase 4 (Implementation)** - Iterative sprint-based development with story-centric workflow
 
----
+Phase 4 focuses on the iterative epic and story cycles where stories are implemented, reviewed, and completed one at a time.
 
-## Phase 4 Workflow Lifecycle
-
-```mermaid
-%%{init: {'theme':'base', 'themeVariables': { 'primaryColor':'#fff','primaryTextColor':'#000','primaryBorderColor':'#000','lineColor':'#000','fontSize':'16px','fontFamily':'arial'}}}%%
-graph TB
-    subgraph Setup["<b>SPRINT SETUP - Run Once</b>"]
-        direction TB
-        SprintPlanning["<b>SM: sprint-planning</b><br/>Initialize sprint status file"]
-    end
-
-    subgraph EpicCycle["<b>EPIC CYCLE - Repeat Per Epic</b>"]
-        direction TB
-        EpicContext["<b>SM: epic-tech-context</b><br/>Generate epic technical guidance"]
-        ValidateEpic["<b>SM: validate-epic-tech-context</b><br/>(Optional validation)"]
-
-        EpicContext -.->|Optional| ValidateEpic
-        ValidateEpic -.-> StoryLoopStart
-        EpicContext --> StoryLoopStart[Start Story Loop]
-    end
-
-    subgraph StoryLoop["<b>STORY LIFECYCLE - Repeat Per Story</b>"]
-        direction TB
-
-        CreateStory["<b>SM: create-story</b><br/>Create next story from queue"]
-        ValidateStory["<b>SM: validate-create-story</b><br/>(Optional validation)"]
-        StoryContext["<b>SM: story-context</b><br/>Assemble dynamic context"]
-        StoryReady["<b>SM: story-ready-for-dev</b><br/>Mark ready without context"]
-        ValidateContext["<b>SM: validate-story-context</b><br/>(Optional validation)"]
-        DevStory["<b>DEV: develop-story</b><br/>Implement with tests"]
-        CodeReview["<b>DEV: code-review</b><br/>Senior dev review"]
-        StoryDone["<b>DEV: story-done</b><br/>Mark complete, advance queue"]
-
-        CreateStory -.->|Optional| ValidateStory
-        ValidateStory -.-> StoryContext
-        CreateStory --> StoryContext
-        CreateStory -.->|Alternative| StoryReady
-        StoryContext -.->|Optional| ValidateContext
-        ValidateContext -.-> DevStory
-        StoryContext --> DevStory
-        StoryReady -.-> DevStory
-        DevStory --> CodeReview
-        CodeReview -.->|Needs fixes| DevStory
-        CodeReview --> StoryDone
-        StoryDone -.->|Next story| CreateStory
-    end
-
-    subgraph EpicClose["<b>EPIC COMPLETION</b>"]
-        direction TB
-        Retrospective["<b>SM: epic-retrospective</b><br/>Post-epic lessons learned"]
-    end
-
-    subgraph Support["<b>SUPPORTING WORKFLOWS</b>"]
-        direction TB
-        CorrectCourse["<b>SM: correct-course</b><br/>Handle mid-sprint changes"]
-        WorkflowStatus["<b>Any Agent: workflow-status</b><br/>Check what's next"]
-    end
-
-    Setup --> EpicCycle
-    EpicCycle --> StoryLoop
-    StoryLoop --> EpicClose
-    EpicClose -.->|Next epic| EpicCycle
-    StoryLoop -.->|If issues arise| CorrectCourse
-    StoryLoop -.->|Anytime| WorkflowStatus
-    EpicCycle -.->|Anytime| WorkflowStatus
-
-    style Setup fill:#e3f2fd,stroke:#1565c0,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
-    style EpicCycle fill:#c5e1a5,stroke:#33691e,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
-    style StoryLoop fill:#f3e5f5,stroke:#6a1b9a,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
-    style EpicClose fill:#ffcc80,stroke:#e65100,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
-    style Support fill:#fff3e0,stroke:#e65100,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
-
-    style SprintPlanning fill:#90caf9,stroke:#0d47a1,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style EpicContext fill:#aed581,stroke:#1b5e20,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style ValidateEpic fill:#c5e1a5,stroke:#33691e,stroke-width:1px,color:#000
-    style CreateStory fill:#ce93d8,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style ValidateStory fill:#e1bee7,stroke:#6a1b9a,stroke-width:1px,color:#000
-    style StoryContext fill:#ce93d8,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style StoryReady fill:#ce93d8,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style ValidateContext fill:#e1bee7,stroke:#6a1b9a,stroke-width:1px,color:#000
-    style DevStory fill:#a5d6a7,stroke:#1b5e20,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style CodeReview fill:#a5d6a7,stroke:#1b5e20,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style StoryDone fill:#a5d6a7,stroke:#1b5e20,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-    style Retrospective fill:#ffb74d,stroke:#e65100,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
-```
+For a visual representation of the complete workflow, see: [workflow-method-greenfield.excalidraw](./images/workflow-method-greenfield.excalidraw)
 
 ---
 
 ## Quick Reference
 
-| Workflow                       | Agent | When                             | Purpose                                     |
-| ------------------------------ | ----- | -------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- |
-| **sprint-planning**            | SM    | Once at Phase 4 start            | Initialize sprint tracking file             |
-| **epic-tech-context**          | SM    | Per epic                         | Generate epic-specific technical guidance   |
-| **validate-epic-tech-context** | SM    | Optional after epic-tech-context | Validate tech spec against checklist        |
-| **create-story**               | SM    | Per story                        | Create next story from epic backlog         |
-| **validate-create-story**      | SM    | Optional after create-story      | Independent validation of story draft       |
-| **story-context**              | SM    | Optional per story               | Assemble dynamic story context XML          |
-| **validate-story-context**     | SM    | Optional after story-context     | Validate story context against checklist    |
-| **story-ready-for-dev**        | SM    | Optional per story               | Mark story ready without generating context |
-| **develop-story**              | DEV   | Per story                        | Implement story with tests                  |
-| **code-review**                | DEV   | Per story                        | Senior dev quality review                   |
-| **story-done**                 | DEV   | Per story                        | Mark complete and advance queue             |
-| **epic-retrospective**         | SM    | After epic complete              | Review lessons and extract insights         |
-| **correct-course**             | SM    | When issues arise                | Handle significant mid-sprint changes       |
-| **workflow-status**            | Any   | Anytime                          | Check "what should I do now?"               |
+| Workflow            | Agent | When                  | Purpose                               |
+| ------------------- | ----- | --------------------- | ------------------------------------- |
+| **sprint-planning** | SM    | Once at Phase 4 start | Initialize sprint tracking file       |
+| **create-story**    | SM    | Per story             | Create next story from epic backlog   |
+| **dev-story**       | DEV   | Per story             | Implement story with tests            |
+| **code-review**     | DEV   | Per story             | Senior dev quality review             |
+| **retrospective**   | SM    | After epic complete   | Review lessons and extract insights   |
+| **correct-course**  | SM    | When issues arise     | Handle significant mid-sprint changes |
 
 ---
 
@@ -132,27 +42,26 @@ graph TB
 
 ### SM (Scrum Master) - Primary Implementation Orchestrator
 
-**Workflows:** sprint-planning, epic-tech-context, validate-epic-tech-context, create-story, validate-create-story, story-context, validate-story-context, story-ready-for-dev, epic-retrospective, correct-course
+**Workflows:** sprint-planning, create-story, retrospective, correct-course
 
 **Responsibilities:**
 
 - Initialize and maintain sprint tracking
-- Generate technical context (epic and story level)
-- Orchestrate story lifecycle with optional validations
-- Mark stories ready for development
-- Handle course corrections
-- Facilitate retrospectives
+- Create stories from epic backlog
+- Handle course corrections when issues arise
+- Facilitate retrospectives after epic completion
+- Orchestrate overall implementation flow
 
 ### DEV (Developer) - Implementation and Quality
 
-**Workflows:** develop-story, code-review, story-done
+**Workflows:** dev-story, code-review
 
 **Responsibilities:**
 
 - Implement stories with tests
 - Perform senior developer code reviews
-- Mark stories complete and advance queue
 - Ensure quality and adherence to standards
+- Complete story implementation lifecycle
 
 ---
 
@@ -183,24 +92,19 @@ Stories move through these states in the sprint status file:
 
 **Per Epic:**
 
-1. SM runs `epic-tech-context`
-2. SM optionally runs `validate-epic-tech-context`
+- Epic context and stories are already prepared from Phase 3
 
 **Per Story (repeat until epic complete):**
 
 1. SM runs `create-story`
-2. SM optionally runs `validate-create-story`
-3. SM runs `story-context` OR `story-ready-for-dev` (choose one)
-4. SM optionally runs `validate-story-context` (if story-context was used)
-5. DEV runs `develop-story`
-6. DEV runs `code-review`
-7. If code review passes: DEV runs `story-done`
-8. If code review finds issues: DEV fixes in `develop-story`, then back to code-review
+2. DEV runs `dev-story`
+3. DEV runs `code-review`
+4. If code review fails: DEV fixes issues in `dev-story`, then re-runs `code-review`
 
 **After Epic Complete:**
 
-- SM runs `epic-retrospective`
-- Move to next epic (start with `epic-tech-context` again)
+- SM runs `retrospective`
+- Move to next epic
 
 **As Needed:**
 
@@ -215,14 +119,6 @@ Stories move through these states in the sprint status file:
 
 Complete each story's full lifecycle before starting the next. This prevents context switching and ensures quality.
 
-### Epic-Level Technical Context
-
-Generate detailed technical guidance per epic (not per story) using `epic-tech-context`. This provides just-in-time architecture without upfront over-planning.
-
-### Story Context (Optional)
-
-Use `story-context` to assemble focused context XML for each story, pulling from PRD, architecture, epic context, and codebase docs. Alternatively, use `story-ready-for-dev` to mark a story ready without generating context XML.
-
 ### Quality Gates
 
 Every story goes through `code-review` before being marked done. No exceptions.
@@ -233,17 +129,7 @@ The `sprint-status.yaml` file is the single source of truth for all implementati
 
 ---
 
-## Common Patterns
-
-### Level 0-1 (Quick Flow)
-
-```
-tech-spec (PM)
-  → sprint-planning (SM)
-  → story loop (SM/DEV)
-```
-
-### Level 2-4 (BMad Method / Enterprise)
+### (BMad Method / Enterprise)
 
 ```
 PRD (PM) → Architecture (Architect)
@@ -251,9 +137,8 @@ PRD (PM) → Architecture (Architect)
   → implementation-readiness (Architect)
   → sprint-planning (SM, once)
   → [Per Epic]:
-      epic-tech-context (SM)
       → story loop (SM/DEV)
-      → epic-retrospective (SM)
+      → retrospective (SM)
   → [Next Epic]
 ```
 
@@ -261,10 +146,9 @@ PRD (PM) → Architecture (Architect)
 
 ## Related Documentation
 
+- [Phase 1: Analysis Workflows](./workflows-analysis.md)
 - [Phase 2: Planning Workflows](./workflows-planning.md)
 - [Phase 3: Solutioning Workflows](./workflows-solutioning.md)
-- [Quick Spec Flow](./quick-spec-flow.md) - Level 0-1 fast track
-- [Scale Adaptive System](./scale-adaptive-system.md) - Understanding project levels
 
 ---
 
@@ -276,20 +160,11 @@ A: Run `workflow-status` - it reads the sprint status file and tells you exactly
 **Q: Story needs significant changes mid-implementation?**
 A: Run `correct-course` to analyze impact and route appropriately.
 
-**Q: Do I run epic-tech-context for every story?**
-A: No! Run once per epic, not per story. Use `story-context` or `story-ready-for-dev` per story instead.
-
-**Q: Do I have to use story-context for every story?**
-A: No, it's optional. You can use `story-ready-for-dev` to mark a story ready without generating context XML.
-
 **Q: Can I work on multiple stories in parallel?**
 A: Not recommended. Complete one story's full lifecycle before starting the next. Prevents context switching and ensures quality.
 
 **Q: What if code review finds issues?**
-A: DEV runs `develop-story` to make fixes, re-runs tests, then runs `code-review` again until it passes.
-
-**Q: When do I run validations?**
-A: Validations are optional quality gates. Use them when you want independent review of epic tech specs, story drafts, or story context before proceeding.
+A: DEV runs `dev-story` to make fixes, re-runs tests, then runs `code-review` again until it passes.
 
 ---