We need to group changed files into semantically related clusters. Files: 1. public/css/company_customization/company-branding-form.css 2. public/js/company_customization/company-branding-form.js 3. public/js/metahuman-standard/components/_button_loading.js 4. src/Service/CompanyBrandingService.php 5. templates/company/components/_company_branding_form.html.twig 6. templates/company/my_company.html.twig Obviously most are related to company branding form feature. The button loading js is likely a utility used by the form or a separate change? It may be a shared component. Need to decide if it belongs with others or separate. Let's examine semantics: The main feature is company branding form: CSS, JS, Twig template, and service. The button loading JS is likely a small modification to handle loading state for buttons, possibly used during form submission. Could be considered part of the same feature if it's used by the branding form. Given the file path "public/js/metahuman-standard/components/_button_loading.js" suggests a standard component library, and it was modified with +12/-3. Without more context, likely it's a supporting utility for form submission. However, the instruction says "Files in the same group typically: Belong to the same module/feature; Have producer/consumer relationships; i18n/config variants; Share same directory and work together on a single concern." The button loading js is in a different directory, but could be a consumer/producer relationship (the branding form JS uses it). Given that, it's reasonable to include it in the same group. But we need to be careful: the instruction says "A group may contain 1 file if it is unrelated to others." If the button loading is unrelated, group it separately. Which is more likely? The name "_button_loading.js" is a component used across many features. The change might be a general bugfix, not specific to company branding. However, it could also be introduced to support the company branding form's async submit. Without more info, we need to infer from typical code review grouping. The other five files clearly form a cohesive feature: Company branding form: CSS, JS, service (backend), twig components/templates. So group A: those 5 files. For button_loading.js: Could be a separate change. But the instruction says "Maximum 10 files per group", and we can have 2 groups. I'd put button_loading.js in its own group only if it's unrelated. But given the theme of "company branding" encompasses form submission, and the loading button is a UI feedback mechanism for forms, it's quite likely related. Also note the company-branding-form.js might reference the button loading component. Since the JS modification is small (+12/-3), it could be an enhancement to support form submission. Let's consider if there are any other dependencies: The twig template likely includes form, and the CSS/JS handle custom styling. The service handles saving branding. The button loading could be used by all forms, but the changes might have been made because the company branding form needs a loading state. The name in "metahuman-standard/components" suggests a standard library shared across the project. But still, the change is in the same commit/PR as the others (we don't know, but we have only these files). Typically, in code review, if a shared component is changed specifically to support a feature, it should be reviewed together with the feature. So I'd include it. Thus one group with all 6 files. But let's check grouping rules: "Every file must appear in exactly one group." So if we have one group, that's fine. Is it allowed to have all files in one group? Yes, if they are semantically related. The maximum is 10, so 6 is fine. Alternatively, we could separate the button_loading.js as an independent change to a shared component. However, without context, it's more helpful to group it with the form because otherwise reviewers might not understand why it changed. The instruction says "producer/consumer relationships (e.g. interface and implementation)" – the form JS may consume the button loading component. So it's a producer/consumer relationship. Thus I'll output one group. Let's make the label: "Company branding form and submission handling" or "Company branding customization feature". Need to output JSON array with objects. Use the file paths as given. Let's format: [ { "label": "Company branding form feature", "files": [ "public/css/company_customization/company-branding-form.css", "public/js/company_customization/company-branding-form.js", "public/js/metahuman-standard/components/_button_loading.js", "src/Service/CompanyBrandingService.php", "templates/company/components/_company_branding_form.html.twig", "templates/company/my_company.html.twig" ] } ] Is there any reason to separate the twig files? They are both template files, related to company page. So fine. I'll output this.