311 lines
9.1 KiB
Markdown
311 lines
9.1 KiB
Markdown
# BMVCS Development Approach
|
|
|
|
**Document Type:** Module Development Analysis
|
|
**Status:** Retrospective Analysis
|
|
**Version:** 1.0.0
|
|
**Date:** 2025-09-30
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Overview
|
|
|
|
This document analyzes the development approach used for creating the BMVCS module and compares it with the standard BMB (BMAD Builder) `create-module` workflow introduced in BMAD v6.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Module Creation Strategy
|
|
|
|
BMVCS was developed using a **direct development approach** rather than the standard BMB `create-module` workflow. This was an intentional choice that proved beneficial for this specific module.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Why Direct Development?
|
|
|
|
### Advantages for BMVCS
|
|
|
|
The direct development approach provided several key benefits:
|
|
|
|
#### 1. Speed
|
|
|
|
- Rapid prototyping without multi-step wizard overhead
|
|
- Immediate implementation of ideas
|
|
- No waiting for workflow prompts
|
|
- Fast iteration cycles
|
|
|
|
#### 2. Flexibility
|
|
|
|
- Freedom to experiment with VCS-agnostic concepts
|
|
- Ability to deviate from standard patterns when needed
|
|
- Custom structure for unique requirements
|
|
- Real-time architectural decisions
|
|
|
|
#### 3. Customization
|
|
|
|
- Unique structure tailored to specific needs
|
|
- Custom VCS adaptation templates system
|
|
- Innovative confidence scoring mechanism
|
|
- Specialized discovery task patterns
|
|
|
|
#### 4. Innovation
|
|
|
|
- Space to develop new patterns
|
|
- Discovery tasks with interactive prompts
|
|
- Adapter agent paradigm
|
|
- Template-based workflow adaptations
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## When to Use Each Approach
|
|
|
|
### Use Direct Development When:
|
|
|
|
✓ You have clear vision of the module structure
|
|
✓ Experimenting with new concepts or patterns
|
|
✓ Working in alpha/research mode
|
|
✓ Need fast iteration cycles
|
|
✓ Creating innovative/non-standard modules
|
|
✓ Have deep understanding of BMAD v6 architecture
|
|
|
|
### Use BMB create-module When:
|
|
|
|
✓ First time creating a BMAD module
|
|
✓ Need guided process with validation
|
|
✓ Want guaranteed v6 compatibility
|
|
✓ Prefer scaffolding over manual creation
|
|
✓ Building standard domain modules
|
|
✓ Want automatic roadmap and TODO generation
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## BMVCS vs BMB Standards Compliance
|
|
|
|
Despite bypassing the BMB workflow, BMVCS fully adheres to BMAD v6 module standards:
|
|
|
|
| Component | BMB Standard | BMVCS Implementation | Status |
|
|
| -------------------- | ----------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------- | ------------ |
|
|
| **Structure** | `agents/`, `workflows/`, `tasks/`, `templates/` | All present | ✅ Compliant |
|
|
| **Installer** | `_module-installer/` with config | Complete with custom logic | ✅ Compliant |
|
|
| **Primary Agent** | Minimum 1 agent | `vcs-adapter.md` | ✅ Compliant |
|
|
| **Workflows** | 2-10 workflows | `setup-vcs` workflow | ✅ Compliant |
|
|
| **Tasks** | Supporting tasks | 3 tasks (discover, adapt, validate) | ✅ Compliant |
|
|
| **Documentation** | README + docs | README + 4 detailed docs | ✅ Compliant |
|
|
| **Templates** | Shared resources | 5 VCS adaptation templates | ✅ Compliant |
|
|
| **Examples** | Usage examples | Comprehensive examples/ folder | ✅ Compliant |
|
|
| **Installer Config** | `install-menu-config.yaml` | Complete configuration | ✅ Compliant |
|
|
| **Module Metadata** | Version, status, code | All present in README | ✅ Compliant |
|
|
|
|
### Additional Components Beyond Standards
|
|
|
|
BMVCS includes components that exceed BMB standards:
|
|
|
|
- **Confidence Scoring System** - Novel VCS detection algorithm
|
|
- **Adaptation Templates** - YAML-based workflow configurations
|
|
- **Interactive Discovery** - Multi-step VCS identification process
|
|
- **Integration Hooks** - Optional BMM agent integration points
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Comparison: What Each Approach Provides
|
|
|
|
### BMB create-module Provides
|
|
|
|
**Workflow Features:**
|
|
|
|
- Interactive module brainstorming session
|
|
- Module brief creation workflow
|
|
- Step-by-step component planning
|
|
- Automatic directory scaffolding
|
|
- Generated configuration files
|
|
- Module validation checks
|
|
- Development roadmap (TODO.md)
|
|
- Post-creation summary
|
|
|
|
**Quality Assurance:**
|
|
|
|
- Guaranteed v6 structure compliance
|
|
- Configuration file templates
|
|
- Installer setup automation
|
|
- Documentation templates
|
|
- Component naming validation
|
|
|
|
### Direct Development Provides
|
|
|
|
**Flexibility:**
|
|
|
|
- Immediate implementation
|
|
- Custom architectural patterns
|
|
- Experimentation freedom
|
|
- Innovation space
|
|
- Rapid prototyping
|
|
|
|
**Trade-offs:**
|
|
|
|
- Manual structure creation
|
|
- Self-validation required
|
|
- Documentation written from scratch
|
|
- Installer logic custom-built
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## BMVCS Development Timeline
|
|
|
|
### Phase 1: Concept & Research
|
|
|
|
- Analyzed BMAD v6 architecture changes
|
|
- Researched VCS-agnostic approaches
|
|
- Studied BMB module structure patterns
|
|
- Decided on direct development approach
|
|
|
|
### Phase 2: Core Structure
|
|
|
|
- Created module directory structure
|
|
- Built VCS Adapter agent
|
|
- Designed discovery task flow
|
|
- Implemented adaptation templates
|
|
|
|
### Phase 3: Integration & Testing
|
|
|
|
- Developed installer configuration
|
|
- Created workflow components
|
|
- Built validation mechanisms
|
|
- Tested with multiple VCS types
|
|
|
|
### Phase 4: Documentation
|
|
|
|
- Wrote comprehensive README
|
|
- Created principle documents
|
|
- Built example implementations
|
|
- Added confidence scoring docs
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Lessons Learned
|
|
|
|
### What Worked Well
|
|
|
|
1. **Rapid Prototyping**
|
|
- Concepts became implementations quickly
|
|
- Easy to pivot when better ideas emerged
|
|
- No workflow constraints slowing progress
|
|
|
|
2. **Custom Innovation**
|
|
- Confidence scoring system emerged naturally
|
|
- Template-based adaptations designed iteratively
|
|
- Discovery flow refined through experimentation
|
|
|
|
3. **Architecture Flexibility**
|
|
- Could break conventions when beneficial
|
|
- Novel patterns (adapter agent) explored freely
|
|
- Integration hooks added organically
|
|
|
|
### What Could Be Improved
|
|
|
|
1. **Validation Checkpoints**
|
|
- Manual verification of BMB compliance needed
|
|
- No automatic structure validation
|
|
- Self-auditing required
|
|
|
|
2. **Documentation Overhead**
|
|
- More upfront documentation writing
|
|
- No auto-generated component lists
|
|
- Manual README maintenance
|
|
|
|
3. **Roadmap Management**
|
|
- No automatic TODO.md generation
|
|
- Manual tracking of remaining work
|
|
- Self-managed development phases
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Recommendations for Future Modules
|
|
|
|
### For Standard Modules
|
|
|
|
**Use BMB create-module workflow:**
|
|
|
|
- Domain-specific modules (Legal, Medical, Finance, etc.)
|
|
- Content creation modules
|
|
- Productivity tools
|
|
- Game development modules
|
|
- Standard agent + workflow combinations
|
|
|
|
### For Innovative Modules
|
|
|
|
**Consider direct development:**
|
|
|
|
- Novel architectural patterns
|
|
- Research/experimental modules
|
|
- Cross-cutting concerns (like BMVCS)
|
|
- Infrastructure modules
|
|
- Tool/builder modules
|
|
|
|
### Hybrid Approach
|
|
|
|
**Combine both methods:**
|
|
|
|
1. Use BMB for initial scaffolding
|
|
2. Customize structure for special needs
|
|
3. Add innovative components manually
|
|
4. Leverage BMB validation at end
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Key Takeaways
|
|
|
|
### Both Approaches Are Valid
|
|
|
|
- **BMB create-module** = Scaffolding tool for structured creation
|
|
- **Direct development** = Production-ready structure built manually
|
|
|
|
### BMVCS Proves a Point
|
|
|
|
Understanding BMAD v6 architecture allows successful module creation without mandatory tooling. The direct development approach can be faster and more flexible for experienced developers working on innovative modules.
|
|
|
|
### This May Become a Pattern
|
|
|
|
The "rapid prototyping pattern" demonstrated by BMVCS development could be documented as an official alternative approach for experienced BMAD module developers.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Future Possibilities
|
|
|
|
### Retrospective BMB Validation
|
|
|
|
- Run BMB validation tools on existing modules
|
|
- Compare hand-built vs generated structures
|
|
- Identify gaps or improvements
|
|
- Update module to incorporate BMB best practices
|
|
|
|
### Tooling Enhancement
|
|
|
|
- Create "validate-module" tool for manual modules
|
|
- Build "enhance-module" to add BMB features to existing modules
|
|
- Develop "module-audit" for compliance checking
|
|
|
|
### Documentation Pattern
|
|
|
|
- Use BMVCS as case study in BMB documentation
|
|
- Show both approaches in module creation guides
|
|
- Provide decision matrix for approach selection
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Conclusion
|
|
|
|
BMVCS demonstrates that direct development is a viable alternative to the BMB create-module workflow for certain types of modules. While BMB provides structure and guidance, direct development offers speed and flexibility for experienced developers working on innovative or experimental modules.
|
|
|
|
The key is understanding **when to use which approach** based on:
|
|
|
|
- Developer experience level
|
|
- Module complexity and novelty
|
|
- Need for speed vs structure
|
|
- Standard vs innovative patterns
|
|
|
|
Both approaches have their place in the BMAD v6 ecosystem, and this document serves as guidance for future module developers choosing their path.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
**Author:** BMAD-METHOD Development Team
|
|
**Contributors:** Claude Code AI Assistant
|
|
**License:** Same as BMAD-METHOD project
|