issue-flow 0.9.0 → 0.11.0

package/dist/{web-WQISLO66.js → web-ANQQTTRD.js}

@@ -4,20 +4,20 @@ import {
   getWebLockFile,
   readWebLock,
   removeWebLock
-} from "./chunk-VNKSMWDN.js";
-import "./chunk-SLHZPB3C.js";
+} from "./chunk-GANSDJV7.js";
+import "./chunk-HQYXVIH6.js";
 import {
   ISSUES_DIR_NAME,
   PROJECTS_DIR_NAME,
   getGlobalRoot,
   loadWebConfig
-} from "./chunk-MTJQOOMG.js";
+} from "./chunk-VQ5VN7DF.js";
 import {
   printError,
   printInfo,
   printWarning,
   sessionSnapshotSchema
-} from "./chunk-57MH6RYJ.js";
+} from "./chunk-HC2MT7BX.js";
 
 // src/web/session-directory.ts
 import { readdir, readFile, stat as statFile } from "fs/promises";
@@ -185,4 +185,4 @@ export {
   runWebServe,
   runWebStop
 };
-//# sourceMappingURL=web-WQISLO66.js.map
+//# sourceMappingURL=web-ANQQTTRD.js.map

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "issue-flow",
-  "version": "0.9.0",
+  "version": "0.11.0",
   "description": "Unified CLI for orchestrating the full issue-flow pipeline via Claude Code Headless",
   "type": "module",
   "bin": {

package/prompts/analyze.md

@@ -39,3 +39,27 @@ Save your analysis to __ANALYSIS_PATH__ with this structure:
 [Key considerations, risks, dependencies]
 
 IMPORTANT: You MUST write the analysis to the file path above. Do not just output it.
+
+<!-- if:__REPO_POLICY__ -->
+## Repository policy
+
+The repository this runs in declares the conventions below. They were discovered
+from its own files (Issue Templates, labels, `AGENTS.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`,
+`CODEOWNERS`) and from its configuration.
+
+__REPO_POLICY__
+
+**This section takes precedence over any convention stated earlier in this
+prompt.** Where the two disagree, follow the repository. Where the repository is
+silent, the defaults above still apply.
+
+Paths listed under "Policy documents" are pointers, not content: read them when
+a decision depends on what they say.
+
+### Judging completeness against this repository
+
+When the section above lists Issue Templates, the applicable one defines what a
+well-formed issue of this kind is expected to carry. Judge the issue's
+completeness against **its** required fields, not against a generic checklist,
+and name the field that is missing rather than asking for more detail in general.
+<!-- /if -->

package/prompts/execute.md

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ You are an autonomous coding agent working on a software project.
 
 1. Read the PRD at `__PRD_FILE__`
 2. Read the progress log at `__PROGRESS_FILE__` (check Codebase Patterns section first)
-3. Check you're on the correct branch from PRD `branchName`. If not, check it out or create from main.
+3. Check you're on the correct branch from PRD `branchName`. If not, check it out or create it from `__BASE_BRANCH__`.
 4. Treat the issue as unresolved if **any** `userStories[].passes` is `false`, **or** if the PRD's top-level `lastReviewFindings` is non-null — that second condition holds even when every story already passes (see "Correction Findings from a Failed Review" below).
 5. If `lastReviewFindings` is non-null, address it first (see below); otherwise pick the **highest priority** user story where `passes: false`
 6. Implement that single user story
@@ -134,3 +134,31 @@ If you need to stop for user guidance or another non-transient blocker, record i
 - Commit frequently
 - Keep CI green
 - Read the Codebase Patterns section in `__PROGRESS_FILE__` before starting
+
+<!-- if:__REPO_POLICY__ -->
+## Repository policy
+
+The repository this runs in declares the conventions below. They were discovered
+from its own files (Issue Templates, labels, `AGENTS.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`,
+`CODEOWNERS`) and from its configuration.
+
+__REPO_POLICY__
+
+**This section takes precedence over any convention stated earlier in this
+prompt.** Where the two disagree, follow the repository. Where the repository is
+silent, the defaults above still apply.
+
+Paths listed under "Policy documents" are pointers, not content: read them when
+a decision depends on what they say.
+<!-- /if -->
+
+<!-- if:__COMMIT_CONVENTION__ -->
+## Commit convention
+
+This repository declares: __COMMIT_CONVENTION__
+
+`<type>` in the commit message above is for you to choose, and it must match the
+**nature of the change** — `fix` for a bug fix, `docs` for documentation, `test`,
+`refactor`, `chore`, `feat` for a new capability. Committing a bug fix as `feat`
+corrupts the changelog and any version bump computed from the history.
+<!-- /if -->

package/prompts/generate.md

@@ -5,13 +5,27 @@ __USER_PROMPT__
 
 Steps:
 1. Analyze the project's tech stack, architecture, and codebase
-2. Check for duplicates before drafting:
+2. Decide the **human language** to write in, in this order of priority:
+   1. the language the user's request is written in;
+   2. the predominant language of the repository's existing issue titles
+      (`gh issue list --limit 10 --state all --json title --jq '.[].title'`);
+   3. the language of the README;
+   4. the language the user wrote in.
+
+   Use it for the title and the whole body. A backlog written in two languages
+   is harder to search than one written in the "wrong" one.
+3. Check for duplicates before drafting. This is a **multi-strategy search** —
+   one query finds only issues worded the way you happened to word yours:
    - Local issues: read `__LOCAL_ISSUES_DIR__/*/metadata.json` (the directory may not exist)
    - Remote issues, only if `gh` is installed and authenticated:
-     `gh issue list --state open --search "<keywords>"`
-   If an existing issue already covers the request, still emit the draft, but
-   say so in the body under a "Possible duplicates" section.
-3. Emit the issue draft in the exact format below
+     - 2-3 different keyword combinations drawn from the title and the core problem:
+       `gh issue list --search "<keyword1> <keyword2>" --state all --limit 30 --json number,title,state,url`
+     - the affected area, when the request names one (auth, database, API…)
+     - a label the request maps to, when the repository has a matching one
+   Judge a candidate on whether it describes the **same problem**, not on textual
+   overlap. If an existing issue already covers the request, still emit the draft,
+   but say so in the body under a "Possible duplicates" section, citing the issue.
+4. Emit the issue draft in the exact format below
 
 The issue should:
 - Have a clear, descriptive title
@@ -27,6 +41,8 @@ with no surrounding commentary:
 <issue-draft>
 <title>Concise, descriptive title</title>
 <labels>label-one, label-two</labels>
+<type>Issue Type, when the repository has them</type>
+<template>path of the Issue Template followed, when there is one</template>
 <body>
 Full issue body in markdown, including context and acceptance criteria.
 </body>
@@ -35,6 +51,44 @@ Full issue body in markdown, including context and acceptance criteria.
 Rules for the block:
 - `<title>` and `<body>` are required; an empty one aborts the command
 - `<labels>` is a comma-separated list; leave it empty when no label applies
-- Only suggest labels that already exist in the repository, or that are
-  conventional (`bug`, `enhancement`, `documentation`)
+- **Only suggest labels that already exist in this repository.** Never invent
+  one, and never create one. A label that does not exist is dropped before the
+  issue is created, so inventing one silently loses the classification. When the
+  section below lists the repository's labels, that list is exhaustive.
+- `<type>` and `<template>` are optional: omit them entirely unless the section
+  below shows that this repository has Issue Types or Issue Templates
 - Write the body as plain markdown — do not wrap it in a code fence
+
+<!-- if:__REPO_POLICY__ -->
+## Repository policy
+
+The repository this runs in declares the conventions below. They were discovered
+from its own files (Issue Templates, labels, `AGENTS.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`,
+`CODEOWNERS`) and from its configuration.
+
+__REPO_POLICY__
+
+**This section takes precedence over any convention stated earlier in this
+prompt.** Where the two disagree, follow the repository. Where the repository is
+silent, the defaults above still apply.
+
+Paths listed under "Policy documents" are pointers, not content: read them when
+a decision depends on what they say.
+
+### Drafting against this repository's conventions
+
+- **Issue Templates.** When the section above lists them, pick the one that fits
+  the request — by its name and description — and write the body to *its*
+  structure, filling every field it marks as required. Report the one you chose
+  in `<template>`. The default structure described earlier in this prompt is the
+  fallback for a repository with no template, not a floor to add on top of one.
+  If two templates fit equally well, say so in the body and pick the more
+  specific: choosing a type is the author's call, and a wrong guess is easier to
+  correct when it is stated.
+- **Issue Types.** When the section above lists them, choose one and put it in
+  `<type>`. A repository with Issue Types has usually *removed* the equivalent
+  textual prefix from titles (`[Bug]`, `[Enhancement]`) precisely because the
+  information moved into a structured field — do not reintroduce it.
+- **Labels.** Use only the ones listed. Anything else is dropped.
+- **Title.** Follow the convention shown above when there is one.
+<!-- /if -->

package/prompts/plan.md

@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ Create a tasks.json file at __TASKS_PATH__ with this exact structure:
   "project": "<repo-name>",
   "issueNumber": __ISSUE_NUMBER__,
   "issueUrl": "__ISSUE_URL__",
-  "branchName": "issue/__ISSUE_NUMBER__-<slug>",
+  "branchName": "<branch, following __BRANCH_CONVENTION__ with N=__ISSUE_NUMBER__>",
   "description": "<brief description>",
   "issueStatus": "pending",
   "completedAt": null,
@@ -74,3 +74,26 @@ Rules:
 - The branchName should use a short kebab-case slug derived from the issue title
 
 IMPORTANT: You MUST write the tasks.json to the file path above. Do not just output it.
+
+<!-- if:__REPO_POLICY__ -->
+## Repository policy
+
+The repository this runs in declares the conventions below. They were discovered
+from its own files (Issue Templates, labels, `AGENTS.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`,
+`CODEOWNERS`) and from its configuration.
+
+__REPO_POLICY__
+
+**This section takes precedence over any convention stated earlier in this
+prompt.** Where the two disagree, follow the repository. Where the repository is
+silent, the defaults above still apply.
+
+Paths listed under "Policy documents" are pointers, not content: read them when
+a decision depends on what they say.
+<!-- /if -->
+
+## Branch naming
+
+`branchName` must follow `__BRANCH_CONVENTION__`, where `{N}` is the issue number
+and `{slug}` a short kebab-case summary of the issue title. A repository that
+declares its own convention above overrides this one.

package/prompts/pr-review.md

@@ -25,9 +25,16 @@ Run these, in this order:
 3. `gh pr diff __PR_NUMBER__ --stat` — size and shape of the change
 4. `git log --oneline <base>..<head>` — commit history of the branch
 5. Read __TASKS_PATH__ and __PRD_PATH__ when they exist, to learn what was intended
-6. Read `CLAUDE.md` (root and any nested ones near the changed files) and `README.md`
-   to learn the project's conventions — a review that contradicts the documented
-   conventions of the repository is a wrong review
+6. Learn the repository's conventions from **its own** sources, not from prior knowledge —
+   a review that contradicts the documented conventions of the repository is a
+   wrong review. When this prompt ends with a section naming the repository's
+   policy documents, read the ones a finding would depend on. Otherwise read
+   `AGENTS.md`, `CLAUDE.md` (root and any nested ones near the changed files) and
+   `README.md`.
+
+   Follow a pointer file rather than stopping at it: a `CLAUDE.md` whose entire
+   content is "Read and follow the instructions in AGENTS.md" is not a repository
+   without conventions, and treating it as one discards everything it forwards to.
 
 ## Step 2 — Budget the diff
 
@@ -79,6 +86,42 @@ of "no problem here", not an axis skipped.
 - **Commit messages**: do they describe the change accurately, at a useful granularity?
 - **Simplification**: concrete opportunities to achieve the same result with less code
 
+<!-- if:__REPO_POLICY__ -->
+- **Repository policy conformance**: does the change respect what this repository
+  declares about itself? Check what applies, from the section at the end of this
+  prompt: the issue body against its Issue Template, labels against the ones that
+  exist, an Issue Type where the repository uses them, the title convention, the
+  Pull Request body against the PR template, the **base branch**, and the branch
+  and commit conventions. Read the policy documents listed there for rules they
+  state as mandatory.
+
+  **Cite where each rule is written** — the document and its section:
+
+  > `docs/engineering/ENGINEERING-STANDARDS.md#git-workflow` requires a branch and
+  > a Pull Request for ordinary changes; this commit went straight to the default
+  > branch.
+
+  A violation without a citation is an opinion, and the author has no way to check
+  whether the reviewer is right.
+
+  **Calibrate the severity.** Turning every formatting divergence into a blocker
+  makes the review noisy, and a noisy review gets ignored:
+
+  | Situation | Severity |
+  |---|---|
+  | A rule the documentation states as mandatory | blocker |
+  | A required template field left out | blocker |
+  | Wrong base branch or wrong target | blocker |
+  | Formatting or naming-convention divergence | observation |
+  | A document the change made stale | observation, unless the rule is mandatory |
+
+  When the change touches paths with a `CODEOWNERS` entry, record who owns them.
+  Do **not** block on it: GitHub enforces the approval, not this review.
+
+  Never restate a repository rule as if it were your own standard, and never
+  invent one it does not declare.
+<!-- /if -->
+
 Ground every finding in the diff: cite `file:line`. A finding you cannot point at is
 speculation — leave it out or mark it clearly as a question.
 
@@ -93,7 +136,8 @@ Pick exactly one recommendation, by these criteria:
 - `REQUEST_CHANGES` — at least one blocker: a bug or regression in the changed
   behaviour, a security or data-loss risk, a broken/absent test for a critical path,
   an unimplemented part of the issue/PRD, or a change that contradicts the project's
-  documented conventions in a way that must be fixed before merge.
+  documented conventions in a way that must be fixed before merge — see the
+  severity table on the policy-conformance axis for where that line falls.
 
 A missing preference or a matter of style is never a blocker. When you hesitate
 between two verdicts, pick the more conservative one and explain why in the summary.
@@ -142,3 +186,20 @@ IMPORTANT: You MUST include the `<pr-review-result>` block, with the recommendat
 written exactly as one of `APPROVE`, `APPROVE_WITH_SUGGESTIONS` or `REQUEST_CHANGES`.
 An output without it, or with any other value, is a failed review — it is never read
 as an approval.
+
+<!-- if:__REPO_POLICY__ -->
+## Repository policy
+
+The repository this runs in declares the conventions below. They were discovered
+from its own files (Issue Templates, labels, `AGENTS.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`,
+`CODEOWNERS`) and from its configuration.
+
+__REPO_POLICY__
+
+**This section takes precedence over any convention stated earlier in this
+prompt.** Where the two disagree, follow the repository. Where the repository is
+silent, the defaults above still apply.
+
+Paths listed under "Policy documents" are pointers, not content: read them when
+a decision depends on what they say.
+<!-- /if -->

package/prompts/pr.md

@@ -15,8 +15,8 @@ __ISSUE_BODY__
 
 Steps:
 1. Read the task plan from __TASKS_PATH__ if it exists
-2. Review the git log for this branch: git log main..HEAD --oneline
-3. Review the diff: git diff main...HEAD --stat
+2. Review the git log for this branch: git log __BASE_BRANCH__..HEAD --oneline
+3. Review the diff: git diff __BASE_BRANCH__...HEAD --stat
 4. Create a well-structured PR using gh pr create
 
 The PR should:
@@ -36,6 +36,40 @@ __ISSUE_CLOSES__
 __MULTI_ISSUE_CONTEXT__
 
 Use this command format:
-gh pr create --title "..." --body "..." --base main
+gh pr create --title "..." --body "..." --base __BASE_BRANCH__
 
 IMPORTANT: Output the PR URL after creation so it can be parsed.
+
+<!-- if:__REPO_POLICY__ -->
+## Repository policy
+
+The repository this runs in declares the conventions below. They were discovered
+from its own files (Issue Templates, labels, `AGENTS.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`,
+`CODEOWNERS`) and from its configuration.
+
+__REPO_POLICY__
+
+**This section takes precedence over any convention stated earlier in this
+prompt.** Where the two disagree, follow the repository. Where the repository is
+silent, the defaults above still apply.
+
+Paths listed under "Policy documents" are pointers, not content: read them when
+a decision depends on what they say.
+<!-- /if -->
+
+<!-- if:__REPO_PR_TEMPLATE__ -->
+## This repository's Pull Request template
+
+Write the body to this template. Keep **every** heading it defines, in its order.
+A section that does not apply gets one line saying why — never delete it:
+automated review and the repository's own checklists key off those headings, so a
+removed section reads as an unanswered one.
+
+```
+__REPO_PR_TEMPLATE__
+```
+
+When the repository has several templates under `.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE/`,
+pick the one matching the nature of this issue and say in the body which one you
+picked. If none clearly fits, ask rather than guess.
+<!-- /if -->

package/prompts/prd.md

@@ -42,3 +42,20 @@ Save the PRD to __PRD_PATH__ with this structure:
 [External dependencies or prerequisites]
 
 IMPORTANT: You MUST write the PRD to the file path above. Do not just output it.
+
+<!-- if:__REPO_POLICY__ -->
+## Repository policy
+
+The repository this runs in declares the conventions below. They were discovered
+from its own files (Issue Templates, labels, `AGENTS.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`,
+`CODEOWNERS`) and from its configuration.
+
+__REPO_POLICY__
+
+**This section takes precedence over any convention stated earlier in this
+prompt.** Where the two disagree, follow the repository. Where the repository is
+silent, the defaults above still apply.
+
+Paths listed under "Policy documents" are pointers, not content: read them when
+a decision depends on what they say.
+<!-- /if -->

package/prompts/review.md

@@ -39,3 +39,43 @@ FINDINGS:
 IMPORTANT: You MUST include the <review-result> block in your output.
 
 IMPORTANT: On FAIL, these FINDINGS are saved verbatim and handed to a correction iteration that has no other context about this review session — it only sees this text. Write each finding as a self-contained, actionable defect report: name the exact file and line, describe what is wrong and why, and state (or strongly imply) what a correct fix looks like. Avoid vague findings like "tests could be improved" — either the codebase fails an acceptance criterion or a regression, or it doesn't.
+
+<!-- if:__REPO_POLICY__ -->
+## Repository policy
+
+The repository this runs in declares the conventions below. They were discovered
+from its own files (Issue Templates, labels, `AGENTS.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`,
+`CODEOWNERS`) and from its configuration.
+
+__REPO_POLICY__
+
+**This section takes precedence over any convention stated earlier in this
+prompt.** Where the two disagree, follow the repository. Where the repository is
+silent, the defaults above still apply.
+
+Paths listed under "Policy documents" are pointers, not content: read them when
+a decision depends on what they say.
+
+### Repository policy conformance
+
+Add this as an explicit axis of the review, alongside the acceptance criteria and
+the regressions:
+
+- The branch and the commits against the conventions above.
+- The changes against any rule the policy documents state as **mandatory**. Read
+  the documents listed there; follow a pointer file rather than stopping at it —
+  a `CLAUDE.md` whose whole content forwards to `AGENTS.md` is not a repository
+  without conventions.
+- Paths with a `CODEOWNERS` entry: record who owns them, and never fail on it.
+
+**Cite the document and section that defines every rule you invoke.** A violation
+without a citation is an opinion, and the author cannot check it.
+
+Only a rule the repository states as **mandatory** — or a required template field
+left out, or a wrong base branch — belongs in FINDINGS. A formatting or naming
+divergence is worth mentioning in the body of your answer, never a FAIL: a review
+that fails on style is a review that gets ignored.
+
+Never restate a repository rule as if it were your own standard, and never invent
+one it does not declare.
+<!-- /if -->

package/dist/analyze-VSWAEVN3.js.map

@@ -1 +0,0 @@
-{"version":3,"sources":["../src/commands/analyze.ts"],"sourcesContent":["import { mkdir, readFile, writeFile } from 'node:fs/promises';\nimport { runHeadless } from '../core/headless.js';\nimport { applyPlaceholders, loadPrompt } from '../core/prompt-resolver.js';\nimport { publishPhaseMetrics } from '../core/session-metrics.js';\nimport { loadTaskPlan, saveTaskPlan } from '../core/state-manager.js';\nimport { getGlobalTimeout } from '../core/verbose.js';\nimport { issuePlaceholders, resolveCommandIssue } from '../issues/context.js';\nimport type { ResolvedIssue } from '../issues/types.js';\nimport { resolveIssuePaths } from '../storage/resolve.js';\nimport { printError, printInfo, printSuccess } from '../ui/logger.js';\n\nexport async function runAnalyze(issue: string, resolvedIssue?: ResolvedIssue): Promise<number> {\n  const issueNumber = issue.replace(/^#/, '');\n  const paths = await resolveIssuePaths(issueNumber);\n  const analysisPath = paths.analysisFile;\n\n  const resolution = await resolveCommandIssue(issueNumber, resolvedIssue);\n  if (!resolution.ok) {\n    return resolution.code;\n  }\n\n  await mkdir(paths.issueDir, { recursive: true });\n\n  const template = await loadPrompt('analyze');\n  const prompt = applyPlaceholders(template, {\n    __ISSUE_NUMBER__: issueNumber,\n    __ANALYSIS_PATH__: analysisPath,\n    // Last: the Issue content is substituted in but never scanned again, so a\n    // body that happens to contain a placeholder is left untouched.\n    ...issuePlaceholders(resolution.resolved),\n  });\n\n  const startedAtMs = Date.now();\n  const result = await runHeadless({\n    prompt,\n    maxTurns: 30,\n    timeout: getGlobalTimeout() ?? 300_000,\n    // json (not text) so the CLI reports usage: the envelope's `result` field\n    // carries the same assistant text this phase already consumed.\n    outputFormat: 'json',\n    allowedTools: ['Bash', 'Read', 'Glob', 'Grep', 'Write'],\n    addDirs: [paths.issueDir],\n    statusMessage: `Analyzing issue #${issueNumber}...`,\n  });\n  // Before the success check: the tokens were spent either way.\n  publishPhaseMetrics('analyze', result.cost, startedAtMs);\n\n  if (!result.success) {\n    printError(`Analysis failed: ${result.error}`);\n    return 1;\n  }\n\n  // Verify the file was created\n  try {\n    const content = await readFile(analysisPath, 'utf-8');\n    if (content.length < 10) {\n      printError('Analysis file was created but appears empty');\n      return 1;\n    }\n  } catch {\n    // File wasn't created by headless — save the result as analysis\n    printInfo('Headless did not create analysis file; saving output directly');\n    await writeFile(analysisPath, result.result, 'utf-8');\n  }\n\n  // Update pipeline state\n  const tasksPath = paths.tasksFile;\n  try {\n    const plan = await loadTaskPlan(tasksPath);\n    plan.pipeline.analyzeCompleted = true;\n    await saveTaskPlan(tasksPath, plan);\n  } catch {\n    // tasks.json may not exist yet — that's OK for standalone analyze\n  }\n\n  printSuccess(`Analysis saved to ${analysisPath}`);\n  return 0;\n}\n"],"mappings":";;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;AAAA,SAAS,OAAO,UAAU,iBAAiB;AAW3C,eAAsB,WAAW,OAAe,eAAgD;AAC9F,QAAM,cAAc,MAAM,QAAQ,MAAM,EAAE;AAC1C,QAAM,QAAQ,MAAM,kBAAkB,WAAW;AACjD,QAAM,eAAe,MAAM;AAE3B,QAAM,aAAa,MAAM,oBAAoB,aAAa,aAAa;AACvE,MAAI,CAAC,WAAW,IAAI;AAClB,WAAO,WAAW;AAAA,EACpB;AAEA,QAAM,MAAM,MAAM,UAAU,EAAE,WAAW,KAAK,CAAC;AAE/C,QAAM,WAAW,MAAM,WAAW,SAAS;AAC3C,QAAM,SAAS,kBAAkB,UAAU;AAAA,IACzC,kBAAkB;AAAA,IAClB,mBAAmB;AAAA;AAAA;AAAA,IAGnB,GAAG,kBAAkB,WAAW,QAAQ;AAAA,EAC1C,CAAC;AAED,QAAM,cAAc,KAAK,IAAI;AAC7B,QAAM,SAAS,MAAM,YAAY;AAAA,IAC/B;AAAA,IACA,UAAU;AAAA,IACV,SAAS,iBAAiB,KAAK;AAAA;AAAA;AAAA,IAG/B,cAAc;AAAA,IACd,cAAc,CAAC,QAAQ,QAAQ,QAAQ,QAAQ,OAAO;AAAA,IACtD,SAAS,CAAC,MAAM,QAAQ;AAAA,IACxB,eAAe,oBAAoB,WAAW;AAAA,EAChD,CAAC;AAED,sBAAoB,WAAW,OAAO,MAAM,WAAW;AAEvD,MAAI,CAAC,OAAO,SAAS;AACnB,eAAW,oBAAoB,OAAO,KAAK,EAAE;AAC7C,WAAO;AAAA,EACT;AAGA,MAAI;AACF,UAAM,UAAU,MAAM,SAAS,cAAc,OAAO;AACpD,QAAI,QAAQ,SAAS,IAAI;AACvB,iBAAW,6CAA6C;AACxD,aAAO;AAAA,IACT;AAAA,EACF,QAAQ;AAEN,cAAU,+DAA+D;AACzE,UAAM,UAAU,cAAc,OAAO,QAAQ,OAAO;AAAA,EACtD;AAGA,QAAM,YAAY,MAAM;AACxB,MAAI;AACF,UAAM,OAAO,MAAM,aAAa,SAAS;AACzC,SAAK,SAAS,mBAAmB;AACjC,UAAM,aAAa,WAAW,IAAI;AAAA,EACpC,QAAQ;AAAA,EAER;AAEA,eAAa,qBAAqB,YAAY,EAAE;AAChD,SAAO;AACT;","names":[]}