Added docs for Workflow component #6871

Nyholm · 2016-08-12T20:06:30Z

This will fix #6677

I want some feedback:

Is there any more features I should cover?
Do you like my blog post project?

Im not happy with the terminology of the classes in this component. Ie "places", "Marking" and "GuardEvent". But I'll make sure to open a separate issue about that.

Nyholm · 2016-08-12T20:25:43Z

components/workflow.rst

+can define the workflow like this::
+
+    $states = ['draft', 'review', 'rejected', 'published'];
+    $transactions[] = new Transition('to_review', ['draft', 'rejected'], 'review');


This will not work. See symfony/symfony#19605

please add use statements for classes in the first code example you're using them.

wouterj · 2016-08-14T11:10:28Z

First a more cosmetic issue: Please add a line break after the first word that crosses the 72th character. It seems like your lines are now longer than this.

Is there any more features I should cover?

I don't know the component, but the docs you've written now are lacking some important details:

What are all these arguments passed to new Transaction()?
What is the MarkingScore and what are ScalarMarkingScore? (and what other marking scores are available?)
There seems to be a Registry to be able to use multiple workflows for different classes, let's also document this.

Do you like my blog post project?

It looks fine to me. However, maybe @lyrixx has some other opinion, as it seems like your concept of the Workflow component (as state machine) differs from his view.

At last, if you have some time, please restructure the workflow component docs in a little different way:

Only document how to initialize the Workflow and Registry class (and all other standalone specific things) in the components docs.
Move the usage docs to a new /workflow directory in the root. This will document framework usage (so the configuration and by using the workflow service). We decided that component users are smart enough to transform framework-usage into component-usage.

Create /workflow.rst in the root, containing:

Workflow
--------

.. toctree::
   :maxdepth: 1
   :glob:

   workflow/*

wouterj · 2016-08-14T11:13:06Z

components/workflow.rst

+
+.. code-block:: php
+
+    $post = new \stdClass();


let's use an imaginary BlogPost class here.

Please prepend this example with // ..., to indicate that this code should be added to the previous code example.

I would rather show the definition of the BlogPost class since it is important that there is a field called currentState.

wouterj · 2016-08-14T11:18:17Z

Oh, and completely forgot to say a big thanks for starting this! Would be great to have this component documented before the release!

mickaelandrieu · 2016-08-14T13:51:38Z

components/workflow.rst

+        public static function getSubscribedEvents()
+        {
+            return array(
+                'workflow.blogpost.guad.to_review' => array('guardReview'),


I guess there is a typo here, isn't it ?

- 'workflow.blogpost.guad.to_review' + 'workflow.blogpost.guard.to_review'

Is it related to the Guard component ? I don't see any security stuff here.

Thank you.

No it is not related to the guard component. It is just named that way. I was also confused in the beginning.

Nyholm · 2016-08-14T13:56:36Z

Thank you for the feedback. Really appreciate that. I will update this PR accordingly. Expect an update tonight or within the next coming days.

mickaelandrieu · 2016-08-14T14:10:48Z

@Nyholm last comment (I will probably be crushed for that), but I think we can't escape the explanation about what is a state machine, and how this component differs from a state machine.

I was pretty sure the component creator have explained it somewhere :) else we will have a lot of (legitimate) questions about "why not a finite state machine ?" , "why workflow and not a state machine?" etc ...

Nyholm · 2016-08-14T14:13:39Z

I think you are correct. I do also want to research if one can consider a state machine as a special case of a workflow.
Anyhow we should definitely have a section where we explain both state machines and workflows and how/why you can/cant use the workflow component with a state machine.

unkind · 2016-08-14T17:35:15Z

components/workflow.rst

+-----
+
+The workflow component gives you an object oriented way to work with state machines. A state machine lets you
+define *places* (or *states*) and *transactions*. A transaction describes the action to get from one place to another.


I think you should replace "transaction" with "transition" everywhere.

unkind · 2016-08-14T18:11:36Z

It would be nice to describe the purpose of the component more.

By now, I fail to understand the component intent: OK, it can be useful for dumping graphs. But I'm pretty sure it should not be used to describe "primary" domain logic to handle these transitions in the domain model. Model should take care of its internal state by itself:

namespace Acme\BlogPosting;

final class BlogPost
{
    public function publish() {
        if ($this->status->equals(PostStatus::published())) {
            return;
        }

        Assertion::true($this->status->equals(PostStatus::waitingForReview()));

        $this->apply(new BlogPostWasPublished($this->id));
    }

    private function whenBlogPostWasPublished(BlogPostWasPublished $event) {
        $this->status = PostStatus::published();
    }
}

Not sure why somebody would replace explicit model invariants with generic Symfony's component.

It's OK to handle "secondary" domain logic though (reflection of a domain model), e.g. if you want to hide some senseless transitions from UI. But it has nothing to do with domain model.

unkind · 2016-08-14T18:41:32Z

And just to be clear, example from author of the component looks like a strong anti-pattern for me. Anaemic domain model with implicit marking property coupled with a framework. What could possibly go wrong?

I don't want to look offensive, but I hope it wouldn't be proclaimed as something like "best practice for your business logic". Because it's not.

wouterj · 2016-08-14T18:59:32Z

Anaemic domain model with implicit marking property coupled with a framework.

Nothing about this property couples it to the framework...

unkind · 2016-08-14T19:09:24Z

Nothing about this property couples it to the framework...

I'm sorry, but I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Coupling with a framework is not the main issue here, but anaemia & vagueness is.

wouterj · 2016-08-14T19:11:56Z

You can name this property anything you want, so that removes the vagueness? (I got your first point, but the model still is as anaemic as you want afaics)

unkind · 2016-08-14T19:39:47Z

You can name this property anything you want, so that removes the vagueness?

No, it doesn't. Still, it is either array or Marking instance. It is something that you can't really explain from domain perspective. It hides domain concepts like "article status" and probably something else. It encourages to replace statuses and flags of the model with vague array.

Further, the component raises vague events like Symfony\Component\Workflow\Event\Event and Symfony\Component\Workflow\Event\TransitionEvent. I wonder how it can be better than explicit BlogPostWasPublished, BlogPostWasReviewed, etc.

I got your first point, but the model still is as anaemic as you want afaics

The thing is the component breaks encapsulation of the model (at least, given examples do). The component wants to control transitions of the BlogPost by changing its properties directly. BlogPost should take care of itself.

mickaelandrieu · 2016-08-14T20:25:02Z

@unkind you may be interested by this study about Petri net and workflow management => https://wwwis.win.tue.nl/~wvdaalst/publications/p53.pdf

Let's focus on docs for now :)

unkind · 2016-08-14T20:40:57Z

@unkind you may be interested by this study about Petri net and workflow management => https://wwwis.win.tue.nl/~wvdaalst/publications/p53.pdf

How does it conflict with my observations?

Let's focus on docs for now

I won't say anything unless docs would provide wrong examples based on procedural approaches instead of object-oriented ones.

mickaelandrieu · 2016-08-16T09:15:12Z

components/workflow.rst

+    $workflow = new Workflow($definition, $marking);
+
+The ``Workflow`` can now help you to decide what actions that are allowed
+on a blog post depending on what *place* it is in. This will keep your domain


It's not about domain logic, it's more about Workflow management logic, isn'it ?

I'd say instead "This will keep your Workflow logic in one place and not spread all over your applications.", what do you think ?

Interesting. I would always consider this the domain logic because the "workflow management logic" is a part of your domain.

The theory behind "Workflow management" is to put the Workflow management outside of your domain, if I've well understood. BlogPost entity shouldn't be modified every time the rules of publishing evolve, for instance.

I'm pretty noob of this field, so correct me if I'm wrong :)

BlogPost entity shouldn't be modified every time the rules of publishing evolve, for instance.

Correct, you just edit the workflow when the rules of publishing changes.

The theory behind "Workflow management" is to put the Workflow management outside of your domain, if I've well understood.

Outside the domain or outside your model? The way I see it there is only three places you can put code/config:

In the framework

In your domain

The glue between your domain and the framework.

Can @lyrixx give some input?

I'm not sure to understand the question / debate here.
Basically, the the data are stored in the model, and you can put the places / transitions everywhere you want. I don't have a rule of thumb for that. IMHO, Simple things are always better than perfect code.

If you write an issue with a summary of your thoughts with pros and cons, I'll be happy to submit a PR for that issue.

I can't do it, because the primary purpose of this Workflow component is not obvious for me:

It would be nice to describe the purpose of the component more.

The component is designed as very generic thing, so in theory it probably may have some interesting applications. However, provided examples don't impress. Compare it with rich domain model:

final class Article { private $id; private $title; private $approvedByJournalist; private $approvedBySpellchecker; private $published; public static function postDraft(int $articleId, ArticleTitle $title): Article { $draft = new self(); $draft->apply(new DraftArticleWasPosted($articleId, $title)); $draft->apply(new ArticleWasSentForApproval($this->id)); return $draft; } private function __construct() {} public function approveByJournalist() { if ($this->approvedByJournalist) { return; } $this->apply(new ArticleWasApprovedByJournalist($this->id)); $this->publishIfItIsReady(); } public function approveBySpellchecker() { if ($this->approvedBySpellchecker) { return; } $this->apply(new ArticleWasApprovedBySpellchecker($this->id)); $this->publishIfItIsReady(); } public function changeTitle(ArticleTitle $newTitle) { if ($this->title->equals($newTitle)) { return; } $this->apply(new ArticleTitleWasChanged($this->id, $newTitle)); $this->apply(new ArticleWasSentForApproval($this->id)); } private function publishIfItIsReady() { if ($this->approvedByJournalist && $this->approvedBySpellchecker) { $this->apply(new ArticleWasPublished($this->id)); } } // ... private function onArticleWasApprovedByJournalist(ArticleWasApprovedByJournalist $event) { $this->approvedByJournalist = true; } private function onArticleWasSentForApproval(ArticleWasSentForApproval $event) { $this->approvedByJournalist = false; $this->approvedBySpellchecker = false; $this->published = false; } private function onArticleTitleWasChanged(ArticleTitleWasChanged $event) { $this->title = $event->getNewTitle(); } }

We see use-cases (postDraft, approveBySpellchecker, approveBySpellchecker, changeTitle), events (ArticleWasApprovedByJournalist, ..., ArticleTitleWasChanged) and it's not hard to understand lifecycle of the Article from this code. We lose this expressiveness.

Further, that sample project checks permissions with GuardEvent hook:

public function onTransitionJournalist(GuardEvent $event) { if (!$this->checker->isGranted('ROLE_JOURNALIST')) { $event->setBlocked(true); } }

... and how you can solve it with commands:

final class ApproveArticleByJournalistHandler { /** * @acl_role ROLE_JOURNALIST */ public function handle(ApproveArticleByJournalist $command) { $blogPost = $this->blogPostRepository->find($command->getArticleId()); $blogPost->approveByJournalist(); $this->blogPostRepository->save($blogPost); } }

And again we lose expressiveness by generic GuardEvent hook. It's harder to find it in the project, your have to search for string "workflow.article.guard.journalist_approval" instead of typing class name "ApproveArticleByJournalis...".

I would like to know if I'm wrong.

IMHO, all this debate is totally out of the scope of this PR.

How is it possible to write docs for the component without clear applications, examples?

I did not said that. But you you are telling us the Workflow component is useless and it's better to write code like your example. It's really a matter of taste (I have a strong opinion on that ; but I let people making their own choices). So I'm juste saying: The component is here, and it's useless to discuss if it's better to use CQRS / ES over Workflow Component.

For the record, the discussion is about the following sentence:

The workflow will keep your domain logic in one place and not spread all over your application

IMHO, it's more important to document how the component works.

I like the @Nyholm's work ; so let's focus on what matter.

@unkind: I hear you. Your arguments are valid.
@mickaelandrieu: Your arguments are also valid.

This is, as Grégoire says, out of scope for this PR. @unkind, I've asked you to create an issue on the symfony/symfony repository. I am happy to make a PR to try to improve the Workflow component regarding your input. Let's work together on this, but not in this PR.

Nyholm · 2016-08-16T09:56:23Z

Massive thank you for the feedback. I've updated the PR accordingly.

I've splited up the docs into multiple parts. One for the component, one for "usage" and one for dumping. What this what you had in mind @wouterj?

That is great @unkind that you challenging this. I appreciate that. Though, Im not the author of the component Im happy if we discuss what the documentation and the examples in the documentations should say and not say (just as you have done so far). There are clearly right and wrong ways of using any component.

I do agree with you that models should manage their own state. But when your models grows that could be a lot of messy code. Also, the workflows may have dependencies outside of the model. Say that you not should be allowed to publish when "[external event(boss is in the office?)]" is happening. Then it is a good thing to move this code outside of the model.

I will continue this PR by filling in the placeholders (twig and state machines)

Documented support for DefinitionBuilder

Nyholm · 2016-11-09T16:26:33Z

There you go. The docs does reflect the code in master

yceruto · 2016-11-09T17:50:50Z

workflow/usage.rst

+    {% endif %}
+
+    {# Or loop through the enabled transistions #}
+    {% for transition in workflow_transitions(article) %}


workflow_transitions(post) instead of article to be consistent with the whole document ?

Thank you! I've updated the PR

xabbuh · 2016-11-11T13:10:33Z

workflow/state-machines.rst

+        $marking = new SingleStateMarkingStore('marking');
+        $stateMachine = new StateMachine($definition, $marking);
+
+


multiple blank lines should always be just one

xabbuh · 2016-11-11T13:11:14Z

workflow/state-machines.rst

+
+    .. code-block:: php
+
+        use Symfony\Component\Workflow\Definition;


please add a comment at the top of the file:

// app/config/config.php

xabbuh · 2016-11-11T13:13:12Z

workflow/state-machines.rst

+        $definition = new Definition($states, $transitions, 'start');
+
+        $marking = new SingleStateMarkingStore('marking');
+        $stateMachine = new StateMachine($definition, $marking);


Actually, we need to show how to configure the DI extension config instead of initially building the workflow itself (same below).

You are correct. I'll fix this.

Thank you for your feedback

xabbuh · 2016-11-11T15:37:23Z

workflow.rst

+
+.. image:: /_images/components/workflow/simple.png
+
+Workflows could be more complicated when they describes a real business case. The


xabbuh · 2016-11-11T15:37:31Z

workflow.rst

+.. image:: /_images/components/workflow/simple.png
+
+Workflows could be more complicated when they describes a real business case. The
+workflow below descirbes the process to fill in a job application.


xabbuh · 2016-11-11T15:37:53Z

workflow.rst

+.. image:: /_images/components/workflow/job_application.png
+
+When you fill in a job application in this example there are 4 to 7 steps depending
+on the what job you are applying for. Some jobs requires personality test, logic tests


require personality tests

xabbuh · 2016-11-11T15:38:19Z

workflow.rst

+logic is not mixed with the controllers, models or view. The order of the steps can be changed
+by changing the configuration only.
+
+


two blank lines

xabbuh · 2016-11-11T15:38:44Z

workflow/dumping-workflows.rst

+
+.. note::
+
+    The ``dot`` command is a part of Graphviz. You can download it and read


xabbuh · 2016-11-11T15:38:53Z

workflow/state-machines.rst

+commonly have cyclic path in the definition graph, but it is common for a state
+machine.
+
+Example of State Machine


Nyholm · 2016-11-11T15:43:20Z

Thank you Christian

xabbuh · 2016-11-11T16:35:07Z

workflow/state-machines.rst

+                        rejected:
+                            from: review
+                            to: closed
+                        reopened:


What do you think about renaming the last four transitions to request_change, accept, reject, and reopen as we are describing actions and not events that just happened?

👍 You are correct

xabbuh · 2016-11-11T16:54:56Z

👍

Great! Thank you for your patience, Tobias!

HeahDude

Thank you for your job on this and sorry for adding other comments on this PR. It's just some suggestions :)

HeahDude · 2016-11-11T16:40:21Z

components/workflow.rst

+A set of places and transitions creates a **definition**. A workflow needs
+a ``Definition`` and a way to write the states to the objects (i.e. an
+instance of a :class:`Symfony\\Component\\Workflow\\MarkingStore\\MarkingStoreInterface`).
+


You should also the initial place with something like: If a definition has no explicit initial place, it uses the first place defined.

HeahDude · 2016-11-11T16:42:05Z

components/workflow.rst

+instance of a :class:`Symfony\\Component\\Workflow\\MarkingStore\\MarkingStoreInterface`).
+
+Consider the following example for a blog post. A post can have one of a number
+of predefined statuses (`draft`, `review`, `rejected`, `published`). In a workflow,


I suggest to use drafted and needs_review instead of draft and review. That allows more readability, one may needs more statuses like reviewed and needs_correction. (I do :D). What about adding archived too?

HeahDude · 2016-11-11T17:39:12Z

components/workflow.rst

+
+    $definition = $builder->build();
+
+    $marking = new SingleStateMarkingStore('currentState');


What about status?

HeahDude · 2016-11-11T17:40:56Z

workflow.rst

+========
+
+A workflow is a model of a process in your application. It may be the process
+of how a blog post goes from draft, review and publish. Another example is when


"drafted, reviewed and published"?

HeahDude · 2016-11-11T17:43:25Z

workflow/state-machines.rst

+                   supports:
+                        - AppBundle\Entity\PullRequest
+                   places:
+                        - start


I've started with many comments, so here a resume of what I suggest for the following:

pull_request: type: 'state_machine' supports: - AppBundle\Entity\PullRequest places: - started - coding - travis - needs_review - reviewed - merged - closed transitions: test: from: [started, coding] to: travis submit: from: travis to: needs_review request_change: from: [travis, needs_review, reviewed] to: coding accept: from: needs_review to: reviewed reject: from: [coding, needs_review, reviewed] to: closed reopen: from: closed to: needs_review merge: from: reviewed to: merged

Wdyt?

Actually when trying to dump it I've found a bug and submitted symfony/symfony#20497 :)

HeahDude · 2016-11-12T00:45:44Z

workflow/usage.rst

+                    marking_store:
+                        type: 'multiple_state' # or 'single_state'
+                        arguments:
+                            - 'currentPlace'


What about

arguments: - 'status' # The name of property that holds the marking in the object

HeahDude · 2016-11-12T00:46:52Z

workflow/usage.rst

+                    supports:
+                        - AppBundle\Entity\BlogPost
+                    places:
+                        - draft


- drafted # By default the initial state is the first place - to_review

while renaming the transition 'submit' ?

HeahDude · 2016-11-12T01:19:00Z

workflow/usage.rst

+        public static function getSubscribedEvents()
+        {
+            return array(
+                'workflow.blogpost.guard.to_review' => array('guardReview'),


The method does not need to be in an array.

…abbuh) This PR was merged into the 3.2-dev branch. Discussion ---------- Added XML support for Workflow configuration | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | master | Bug fix? | yes | New feature? | no | BC breaks? | no | Deprecations? | no | Tests pass? | yes | Fixed tickets | - | License | MIT | Doc PR | symfony/symfony-docs#6871 Commits ------- 94a7e7e [Workflow] streamline XML schema definition 6381caa Added XML support for Workflow configuration

mickaelandrieu · 2016-11-30T22:46:49Z

components/workflow.rst

@@ -5,8 +5,8 @@
 The Workflow Component
 ======================

-    The Workflow component provides tools for managing a workflow or finite state
-    machine.
+    The Workflow component provides tools for managing a workflow or finite


isn't a Petri net instead ?

@mickaelandrieu a workflow is a subset of a petri net (and a state machine a subset of workflow). The component does not support all features necessary to implement a petri net

it's unclear to me right now, but it's not a problem in the docs: I just need to learn a little bit more about all of theses implementations ^^

Thank you @stof

mickaelandrieu · 2016-11-30T22:48:06Z

components/workflow.rst

+Creating a Workflow
+-------------------
+
+The workflow component gives you an object oriented way to define a process


The more I read this, the more I think we should rename - at least in docs - Workflow component to Workflow Engine component. Am I crazy ? /c @Nyholm

xabbuh · 2016-12-01T14:13:41Z

Thank you Tobias.

This PR was submitted for the master branch but it was merged into the 3.2 branch instead (closes #6871). Discussion ---------- Added docs for Workflow component This will fix #6677 I want some feedback: - Is there any more features I should cover? - Do you like my blog post project? Im not happy with the terminology of the classes in this component. Ie "places", "Marking" and "GuardEvent". But I'll make sure to open a separate issue about that. Commits ------- ba49091 Added docs for Workflow component

xabbuh · 2016-12-01T14:17:32Z

I decided to merge this PR now as Symfony 3.2 was released and @Nyholm delivered a great talk today at SymfonyCon in Berlin. So people will probably want to read some documentation for the new component. Though I left a comment in #6677 so that we do not forget to talk about the latest comments here.

carsonbot added the Status: Needs Review label Aug 12, 2016

Nyholm reviewed Aug 12, 2016
View reviewed changes

wouterj reviewed Aug 14, 2016
View reviewed changes

wouterj added Status: Needs Work and removed Status: Needs Review labels Aug 14, 2016

wouterj added this to the 3.2 milestone Aug 14, 2016

mickaelandrieu reviewed Aug 14, 2016
View reviewed changes

unkind reviewed Aug 14, 2016
View reviewed changes

mickaelandrieu reviewed Aug 16, 2016
View reviewed changes

Nyholm added 2 commits November 9, 2016 17:20

Merge pull request #1 from Nyholm/workflow-definition-builder

2511c21

Documented support for DefinitionBuilder

Updated to support changes in symfony/symfony#20462

c9b1656

yceruto reviewed Nov 9, 2016

View reviewed changes

Updated twig example

2cc2934

xabbuh reviewed Nov 11, 2016

View reviewed changes

show how to configure the DI extension config

47dc11d

xabbuh reviewed Nov 11, 2016

View reviewed changes

workflow/dumping-workflows.rst

.. note::

The ``dot`` command is a part of Graphviz. You can download it and read

Copy link

Member

xabbuh Nov 11, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is part of

xabbuh reviewed Nov 11, 2016

View reviewed changes

Fixed typos

3250621

xabbuh reviewed Nov 11, 2016

View reviewed changes

Use imperative instead of past tense.

c0bd6da

HeahDude mentioned this pull request Nov 12, 2016

[Workflow] added a TransitionsCollectionBuilder so DefinitionBuilder doesn't need Transition objects symfony/symfony#20498

Closed

HeahDude reviewed Nov 12, 2016

View reviewed changes

mickaelandrieu reviewed Nov 30, 2016

View reviewed changes

xabbuh closed this Dec 1, 2016

xabbuh mentioned this pull request Dec 1, 2016

[Workflow] Add documentation for the Workflow Component #6677

Closed

		$marking = new SingleStateMarkingStore('marking');
		$stateMachine = new StateMachine($definition, $marking);


		.. code-block:: php

		use Symfony\Component\Workflow\Definition;


		.. image:: /_images/components/workflow/simple.png

		Workflows could be more complicated when they describes a real business case. The

		logic is not mixed with the controllers, models or view. The order of the steps can be changed
		by changing the configuration only.


		.. note::

		The ``dot`` command is a part of Graphviz. You can download it and read


		$definition = $builder->build();

		$marking = new SingleStateMarkingStore('currentState');

Added docs for Workflow component #6871

Added docs for Workflow component #6871

Conversation

Nyholm commented Aug 12, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

wouterj commented Aug 14, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

wouterj commented Aug 14, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Nyholm commented Aug 14, 2016

mickaelandrieu commented Aug 14, 2016 • edited Loading

Nyholm commented Aug 14, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

unkind commented Aug 14, 2016 • edited Loading

unkind commented Aug 14, 2016 • edited Loading

wouterj commented Aug 14, 2016

unkind commented Aug 14, 2016

wouterj commented Aug 14, 2016

unkind commented Aug 14, 2016 • edited Loading

mickaelandrieu commented Aug 14, 2016

unkind commented Aug 14, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

unkind Aug 16, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Nyholm commented Aug 16, 2016

Nyholm commented Nov 9, 2016

yceruto Nov 9, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Nyholm commented Nov 11, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xabbuh commented Nov 11, 2016

HeahDude left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mickaelandrieu Dec 1, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mickaelandrieu Nov 30, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xabbuh commented Dec 1, 2016

xabbuh commented Dec 1, 2016

wouterj commented Aug 14, 2016 •

edited

Loading

mickaelandrieu commented Aug 14, 2016 •

edited

Loading

Nyholm commented Aug 14, 2016 •

edited

Loading

unkind commented Aug 14, 2016 •

edited

Loading

unkind commented Aug 14, 2016 •

edited

Loading

unkind commented Aug 14, 2016 •

edited

Loading

unkind commented Aug 14, 2016 •

edited

Loading

unkind Aug 16, 2016 •

edited

Loading

yceruto Nov 9, 2016 •

edited

Loading

mickaelandrieu Dec 1, 2016 •

edited

Loading

mickaelandrieu Nov 30, 2016 •

edited

Loading