library: return required update for each crate #398

MarcoIeni · 2023-02-23T22:15:09Z

First step to add more info to the Report struct.
This is a small improvement towards #396

Probably in the future you don't even want to store the required_bump of each crate, because you could deduce it by iterating on the crate report errors. However, I decided to store it because it seemed like a good first iteration.

obi1kenobi

Seems mostly okay, just a couple of minor points.

obi1kenobi · 2023-02-25T05:56:43Z

src/lib.rs

-        let success = all_outcomes
-            .into_iter()
-            .fold_ok(true, std::ops::BitAnd::bitand)?;

-        Ok(Report { success })
+        Ok(Report {
+            crate_reports: all_outcomes?,
+        })


This has a subtle behavior change: the old code runs all the checks even if some of them error out because it merges the Result values late, whereas the new code relies on .collect() which will bail at the first Err.

Since the check output is user-visible, this seems net-negative to me? But I could probably be persuaded otherwise.

Yes, you are right. I addressed this in 1445fb6

Unfortunately using a BTreeMap instead of a Vec resulted in uglier code :/

src/lib.rs

Co-authored-by: Predrag Gruevski <2348618+obi1kenobi@users.noreply.github.com>

MarcoIeni · 2023-02-25T10:00:06Z

I suggest to view the changes from VSCode GitHub plugin or another tool. GitHub diff is confused by the different indentation I think.

obi1kenobi · 2023-02-27T15:53:38Z

src/lib.rs

+        // Create a report for each crate.
+        let all_outcomes: anyhow::Result<BTreeMap<String, anyhow::Result<CrateReport>>> =


Two concerns here:

I feel like this code has gotten a bit too complex and intricate. It took me probably 10-15 minutes to figure out what exactly is going on, and that's when I was already familiar with what this code was doing. We're adding significant new complexity here — do you think there's a reasonable refactor we could do to improve the readability in the process?

The Result<Map<String, Result<CrateReport>>> type is quite confusing, especially because it isn't documented what becomes an inner error vs an outer error. It seems that failure to generate the rustdoc becomes an outer error? Is that right? And if so, should that be the case? I'm genuinely not sure.

We're adding significant new complexity here

I agree. But trying to address this is not easy, because you can't simply ? everywhere when you have a BTreeMap.

do you think there's a reasonable refactor we could do to improve the readability in the process?

I will try to think about it and change that big Result type.

obi1kenobi

Overall looks quite good! Sorry for the delay, I just got home from a family vacation.

I just have a small concern around naming / docs in the new CrateReport type. Otherwise this should be easy to merge and I can release a new version as soon as that happens.

obi1kenobi · 2023-03-22T22:04:54Z

src/lib.rs

+                        ScopeMode::DenyList(_) =>
+                            match &self.current.source {
+                                RustdocSource::Rustdoc(_) =>
+                                    vec!["the-name-doesnt-matter-here".to_string()],
+                                _ => panic!("couldn't deduce crate name, specify one through the package allow list")
+                            }
+                        ScopeMode::AllowList(lst) => lst.clone(),
+                    };


This change seems to be only an indent and not necessary. Let's avoid it?

obi1kenobi · 2023-03-22T22:09:20Z

src/lib.rs

+#[non_exhaustive]
+#[derive(Debug)]
+pub struct CrateReport {
+    required_bump: Option<RequiredSemverUpdate>,


I'm a bit confused here.

required_bump sounds like "what is the minimum bump that satisfies semver" but based on the Option type and new_successful() function, it seems like it might actually be "this change is semver-incompliant and needs to be instead"?

Is my understanding correct? If so, it would be good to do one more editing pass on the naming and docs for the sake of clarity, since this is public API after all.

I took the "required" word of required_bump from the stdout of the binary.

So the naming should be ok, I guess 🤔 but I'll add more comments :)
I agree that the Option makes it confusing. I changed it to "Patch"

MarcoIeni · 2023-04-09T19:14:39Z

Can you help me understand why CI is failing?

obi1kenobi · 2023-04-09T20:51:38Z

Sorry about the failing CI, @mgr0dzicki was tweaking something in the target project that corresponds to the failing job. The test case here was written quite defensively (in a good way!) but that just means it "noticed" the change. It just needs a small update and I'll merge the fix right away.

obi1kenobi · 2023-04-09T20:57:11Z

It's actually quite concerning that the Windows equivalent of the job passed while the regular Linux one failed. They are testing the same thing, and it makes me feel that the Windows one isn't actually testing it correctly...

obi1kenobi · 2023-04-26T00:17:22Z

src/lib.rs

+    /// Minimum bump required to respect semver.
+    /// For example, if the crate contains breaking changes, this is [`ReleaseType::Major`].
+    /// If no bump is required, this is [`Option::None`].


Is this accurate?

Say we ran a semver-check over a crate where the detected bump is ActualSemverUpdate::Major. Would required_bump actually be Some(ReleaseType::Major)?

If no bump is required, the value will be None, but is that the only time? I think there are other situations where the value might be None.

Let's back this up with some tests? Consider making a new integration test file in the tests/ directory to pin down the behavior here.

MarcoIeni · 2023-04-26T20:25:51Z

The tests I added on 6cf3622 works locally.
Can you help me understand how to pass CI?

obi1kenobi

The test crate's name in Cargo.toml didn't match its directory, which the test suite requires to run. I'm guessing your locally-generated rustdoc contains some older version of the file, and if you wipe your localdata directory and regenerate all the rustdoc, you'll see the same error locally.

test_crates/trait_missing_with_major_bump/new/Cargo.toml

test_crates/trait_missing_with_major_bump/old/Cargo.toml

Co-authored-by: Predrag Gruevski <2348618+obi1kenobi@users.noreply.github.com>

MarcoIeni · 2023-05-02T20:01:22Z

Deleting the localdata folder helped. I was seeing weird errors like:


---- query::tests_lints::function_const_removed stdout ----
thread 'query::tests_lints::function_const_removed' panicked at 'Once instance has previously been poisoned', /Users/marcoieni/.cargo/registry/src/index.crates.io-6f17d22bba15001f/lazy_static-1.4.0/src/inline_lazy.rs:30:16

Now I see the same error locally 👍
Consider adding instructions to delete the localdata folder to this error: Also, remember about running ./scripts/regenerate_test_rustdocs.sh when needed.

MarcoIeni · 2023-05-02T20:07:39Z

can you help me fix this last error? 😅
I don't know why the test fails

obi1kenobi · 2023-05-02T21:14:23Z

I'm not near a computer at the moment, but look for an error near the top of the stack of messages -- or just rerun a single test. Something panicked and poisoned the mutex, and that then caused the errors you showed here.

…

On Tue, May 2, 2023, 4:07 PM Marco Ieni ***@***.***> wrote: can you help me fixing this last error? 😅 — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#398 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAR5MSWDCFLT6CSGLDVZZH3XEFSRLANCNFSM6AAAAAAVGF4NYY> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

MarcoIeni · 2023-05-02T21:34:20Z

I fixed that error thanks to your previous help 👍
now there's another error:

---- query::tests_lints::trait_unsafe_removed stdout ----
thread 'query::tests_lints::trait_unsafe_removed' panicked at '
Query trait_unsafe_removed produced incorrect output (./src/lints/trait_unsafe_removed.ron).

Expected output (./test_outputs/trait_unsafe_removed.output.ron):
{
    "./test_crates/trait_missing/": [
        {
            "name": String("TraitStopsBeingUnsafe"),
            "path": List([
                String("trait_missing"),
                String("TraitStopsBeingUnsafe"),
            ]),
            "span_begin_line": Uint64(6),
            "span_filename": String("src/lib.rs"),
            "visibility_limit": String("public"),
        },
    ],
    "./test_crates/trait_unsafe_removed/": [
        {
            "name": String("TraitBecomesSafe"),
            "path": List([
                String("trait_unsafe_removed"),
                String("TraitBecomesSafe"),
            ]),
            "span_begin_line": Uint64(2),
            "span_filename": String("src/lib.rs"),
            "visibility_limit": String("public"),
        },
    ],
}

Actual output:
{
    "./test_crates/trait_missing/": [
        {
            "name": String("TraitStopsBeingUnsafe"),
            "path": List([
                String("trait_missing"),
                String("TraitStopsBeingUnsafe"),
            ]),
            "span_begin_line": Uint64(6),
            "span_filename": String("src/lib.rs"),
            "visibility_limit": String("public"),
        },
    ],
    "./test_crates/trait_missing_with_major_bump/": [
        {
            "name": String("TraitStopsBeingUnsafe"),
            "path": List([
                String("trait_missing_with_major_bump"),
                String("TraitStopsBeingUnsafe"),
            ]),
            "span_begin_line": Uint64(6),
            "span_filename": String("src/lib.rs"),
            "visibility_limit": String("public"),
        },
    ],
    "./test_crates/trait_unsafe_removed/": [
        {
            "name": String("TraitBecomesSafe"),
            "path": List([
                String("trait_unsafe_removed"),
                String("TraitBecomesSafe"),
            ]),
            "span_begin_line": Uint64(2),
            "span_filename": String("src/lib.rs"),
            "visibility_limit": String("public"),
        },
    ],
}

Note that the individual outputs might have been deliberately reordered.

Also, remember about running ./scripts/regenerate_test_rustdocs.sh when needed.
', src/query.rs:400:13
stack backtrace:
   0: rust_begin_unwind
             at /rustc/071f14baae931e17a5a99366bf216e76384cc4f6/library/std/src/panicking.rs:[578](https://github.com/obi1kenobi/cargo-semver-checks/actions/runs/4865060452/jobs/8674882462#step:9:579):5
   1: core::panicking::panic_fmt
             at /rustc/071f14baae931e17a5a99366bf216e76384cc4f6/library/core/src/panicking.rs:67:14
   2: cargo_semver_checks::query::tests::check_query_execution
             at ./src/query.rs:400:13
   3: cargo_semver_checks::query::tests_lints::trait_unsafe_removed
             at ./src/query.rs:442:21
   4: cargo_semver_checks::query::tests_lints::trait_unsafe_removed::{{closure}}
             at ./src/query.rs:441:28
   5: core::ops::function::FnOnce::call_once
             at /rustc/071f14baae931e17a5a99366bf216e76384cc4f6/library/core/src/ops/function.rs:250:5
   6: core::ops::function::FnOnce::call_once
             at /rustc/071f14baae931e17a5a99366bf216e7[638](https://github.com/obi1kenobi/cargo-semver-checks/actions/runs/4865060452/jobs/8674882462#step:9:639)4cc4f6/library/core/src/ops/function.rs:250:5
note: Some details are omitted, run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=full` for a verbose backtrace.


failures:
    query::tests_lints::trait_missing
    query::tests_lints::trait_unsafe_added
    query::tests_lints::trait_unsafe_removed

test result: FAILED. 61 passed; 3 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 8.02s

obi1kenobi · 2023-05-02T21:48:02Z

All lints run on all test crates, and it seems that your new test crate causes a few more lints to flag issues. Just review the issues they raise and if everything looks good, then update the expected output files :)

…

On Tue, May 2, 2023, 5:34 PM Marco Ieni ***@***.***> wrote: I fixed that error thanks to your previous help 👍 now there's another error <https://github.com/obi1kenobi/cargo-semver-checks/actions/runs/4865060452/jobs/8674882462> : ---- query::tests_lints::trait_unsafe_removed stdout ---- thread 'query::tests_lints::trait_unsafe_removed' panicked at ' Query trait_unsafe_removed produced incorrect output (./src/lints/trait_unsafe_removed.ron). Expected output (./test_outputs/trait_unsafe_removed.output.ron): { "./test_crates/trait_missing/": [ { "name": String("TraitStopsBeingUnsafe"), "path": List([ String("trait_missing"), String("TraitStopsBeingUnsafe"), ]), "span_begin_line": Uint64(6), "span_filename": String("src/lib.rs"), "visibility_limit": String("public"), }, ], "./test_crates/trait_unsafe_removed/": [ { "name": String("TraitBecomesSafe"), "path": List([ String("trait_unsafe_removed"), String("TraitBecomesSafe"), ]), "span_begin_line": Uint64(2), "span_filename": String("src/lib.rs"), "visibility_limit": String("public"), }, ], } Actual output: { "./test_crates/trait_missing/": [ { "name": String("TraitStopsBeingUnsafe"), "path": List([ String("trait_missing"), String("TraitStopsBeingUnsafe"), ]), "span_begin_line": Uint64(6), "span_filename": String("src/lib.rs"), "visibility_limit": String("public"), }, ], "./test_crates/trait_missing_with_major_bump/": [ { "name": String("TraitStopsBeingUnsafe"), "path": List([ String("trait_missing_with_major_bump"), String("TraitStopsBeingUnsafe"), ]), "span_begin_line": Uint64(6), "span_filename": String("src/lib.rs"), "visibility_limit": String("public"), }, ], "./test_crates/trait_unsafe_removed/": [ { "name": String("TraitBecomesSafe"), "path": List([ String("trait_unsafe_removed"), String("TraitBecomesSafe"), ]), "span_begin_line": Uint64(2), "span_filename": String("src/lib.rs"), "visibility_limit": String("public"), }, ], } Note that the individual outputs might have been deliberately reordered. Also, remember about running ./scripts/regenerate_test_rustdocs.sh when needed. ', src/query.rs:400:13 stack backtrace: 0: rust_begin_unwind at /rustc/071f14baae931e17a5a99366bf216e76384cc4f6/library/std/src/panicking.rs:[578](https://github.com/obi1kenobi/cargo-semver-checks/actions/runs/4865060452/jobs/8674882462#step:9:579):5 1: core::panicking::panic_fmt at /rustc/071f14baae931e17a5a99366bf216e76384cc4f6/library/core/src/panicking.rs:67:14 2: cargo_semver_checks::query::tests::check_query_execution at ./src/query.rs:400:13 3: cargo_semver_checks::query::tests_lints::trait_unsafe_removed at ./src/query.rs:442:21 4: cargo_semver_checks::query::tests_lints::trait_unsafe_removed::{{closure}} at ./src/query.rs:441:28 5: core::ops::function::FnOnce::call_once at /rustc/071f14baae931e17a5a99366bf216e76384cc4f6/library/core/src/ops/function.rs:250:5 6: core::ops::function::FnOnce::call_once at /rustc/071f14baae931e17a5a99366bf216e7[638](https://github.com/obi1kenobi/cargo-semver-checks/actions/runs/4865060452/jobs/8674882462#step:9:639)4cc4f6/library/core/src/ops/function.rs:250:5 note: Some details are omitted, run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=full` for a verbose backtrace. failures: query::tests_lints::trait_missing query::tests_lints::trait_unsafe_added query::tests_lints::trait_unsafe_removed test result: FAILED. 61 passed; 3 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 8.02s — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#398 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAR5MSXADMSHGUVNYIH57XDXEF4WPANCNFSM6AAAAAAVGF4NYY> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

MarcoIeni · 2023-05-02T22:04:24Z

Thanks, I think I have done it 👍
Please, consider using something like insta or expect_test to improve the developer experience.

obi1kenobi · 2023-05-02T22:11:03Z

I'd happily look at a PR for either insta or expect_test, whichever you think is better! Last I looked, neither was a clear improvement since our tests aren't just snapshot but also require running the rustdoc generation script first, so it seemed like any effort dedicated to making the experience better would be equally (or better) spent on making the existing approach better.

Would love to be proven wrong on this!

obi1kenobi

The design looks good! Just a few tweaks to doc comments and this is ready to merge 🎉

src/lib.rs

obi1kenobi · 2023-05-02T22:15:17Z

src/lib.rs

+                match self.detected_bump {
+                    // If user bumped the major version, any breaking change is accepted.
+                    ActualSemverUpdate::Major => true,
+                    ActualSemverUpdate::Minor => {
+                        matches!(required_bump, ReleaseType::Minor | ReleaseType::Patch)
+                    }
+                    ActualSemverUpdate::Patch | ActualSemverUpdate::NotChanged => {
+                        required_bump == ReleaseType::Patch
+                    }


Does this need updating for the changes to the semantics of the struct's fields? It seems to me like some of these could be assert instead of comparisons.

Yes, you are right. I think it should never happen that the update of detected_bump is the same of required_bump, right?
Maybe we can add some warnings in this case. Or do you prefer to write an assert? Sounds scary 😅

Let's assert. If our design behaves unexpectedly, it should fail loudly and quickly so we can figure out the failure mode and fix it.

I think required_bump should never be equal to or lesser than detected_bump in this design. If we're wrong about that, there's some serious issue we've overlooked and the outcome shouldn't be trusted anyway.

I added the assert in 9cf72ee

src/lib.rs

src/query.rs

obi1kenobi · 2023-05-02T22:20:24Z

test_outputs/trait_missing_with_major_bump.output.ron

Are you sure this file is necessary? I don't recall the exact setup of the test suite, but I think the output files are per-lint, not per-test-crate, and trait_missing_with_major_bump is a test crate, not a lint. So that means its data can appear in lints' output files, but I don't think anything will read this file since it doesn't correspond to any lint.

removed in 54042b5

Co-authored-by: Predrag Gruevski <2348618+obi1kenobi@users.noreply.github.com>

obi1kenobi

Looks great, let's ship it! Thanks for all the work on this, and sorry reviews took a while. I'm hoping my schedule calms down a bit going forward.

Also -- this found an ICE in nightly Rust. @MarcoIeni would you care to report it?

obi1kenobi

Looks great, let's ship it! Thanks for all the work on this, and sorry reviews took a while. I'm hoping my schedule calms down a bit going forward.

Also -- this found an ICE in nightly Rust. @MarcoIeni would you care to report it?

MarcoIeni · 2023-05-07T20:52:15Z

would you care to report it?

somebody already reported it in rust-lang/rust#111320

I'm hoping my schedule calms down a bit going forward.

No problem at all, thanks for the very detailed review :)

MarcoIeni added 5 commits February 23, 2023 23:13

library: return required update for each crate

410152f

Merge branch 'main' into crate-report

40e6ec2

comment

910ad05

logic

55ab5fc

better explanation

9e84da2

MarcoIeni marked this pull request as ready for review February 23, 2023 22:31

obi1kenobi reviewed Feb 25, 2023

View reviewed changes

MarcoIeni and others added 5 commits February 25, 2023 10:30

all instead of any

15ff574

Co-authored-by: Predrag Gruevski <2348618+obi1kenobi@users.noreply.github.com>

Merge branch 'main' into crate-report

8ac3889

remove useless required_bump function

41540c5

process all crates before returning error

1445fb6

fmt

6f1bcee

MarcoIeni requested a review from obi1kenobi February 25, 2023 10:00

Add missing indent.

31e8845

obi1kenobi reviewed Feb 27, 2023

View reviewed changes

MarcoIeni added 2 commits March 9, 2023 06:20

Merge branch 'main' into crate-report

a13e4fc

simpler

b022958

MarcoIeni requested a review from obi1kenobi March 20, 2023 22:06

obi1kenobi reviewed Mar 22, 2023

View reviewed changes

MarcoIeni added 7 commits March 25, 2023 22:25

Merge branch 'main' into crate-report

0963ebd

unused import

569abc5

indent

85a22b1

use Patch instead of None

daa65ff

fix

32a2411

wip

0a5f85b

comment

d40c975

MarcoIeni requested a review from obi1kenobi April 25, 2023 21:01

obi1kenobi reviewed Apr 26, 2023

View reviewed changes

MarcoIeni added 2 commits April 26, 2023 22:09

add tests

6cf3622

add test output

08c2cde

Merge branch 'main' into crate-report

6fa8703

obi1kenobi reviewed May 2, 2023

View reviewed changes

test_crates/trait_missing_with_major_bump/new/Cargo.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

test_crates/trait_missing_with_major_bump/old/Cargo.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

MarcoIeni and others added 2 commits May 2, 2023 21:34

Update test_crates/trait_missing_with_major_bump/new/Cargo.toml

f18e295

Co-authored-by: Predrag Gruevski <2348618+obi1kenobi@users.noreply.github.com>

Update test_crates/trait_missing_with_major_bump/old/Cargo.toml

b55719f

Co-authored-by: Predrag Gruevski <2348618+obi1kenobi@users.noreply.github.com>

update test output

8920c8f

obi1kenobi reviewed May 2, 2023

View reviewed changes

MarcoIeni and others added 8 commits May 3, 2023 18:29

remove unuseful file

54042b5

Update src/lib.rs

dba13c0

Co-authored-by: Predrag Gruevski <2348618+obi1kenobi@users.noreply.github.com>

Update src/lib.rs

3a03294

Co-authored-by: Predrag Gruevski <2348618+obi1kenobi@users.noreply.github.com>

Update src/lib.rs

9c70539

Co-authored-by: Predrag Gruevski <2348618+obi1kenobi@users.noreply.github.com>

comment

5018e90

crate reports comment

cf47884

add assert

9cf72ee

Merge branch 'main' into crate-report

f24cac5

obi1kenobi approved these changes May 7, 2023

View reviewed changes

obi1kenobi merged commit 904c914 into obi1kenobi:main May 7, 2023

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

library: return required update for each crate #398

library: return required update for each crate #398

MarcoIeni commented Feb 23, 2023 •

edited

Loading

obi1kenobi left a comment

obi1kenobi Feb 25, 2023

MarcoIeni Feb 25, 2023

MarcoIeni commented Feb 25, 2023

obi1kenobi Feb 27, 2023

MarcoIeni Feb 27, 2023

obi1kenobi left a comment

obi1kenobi Mar 22, 2023

obi1kenobi Mar 22, 2023

MarcoIeni Apr 9, 2023 •

edited

Loading

MarcoIeni commented Apr 9, 2023

obi1kenobi commented Apr 9, 2023

obi1kenobi commented Apr 9, 2023

obi1kenobi Apr 26, 2023

MarcoIeni commented Apr 26, 2023

obi1kenobi left a comment

MarcoIeni commented May 2, 2023

MarcoIeni commented May 2, 2023 •

edited

Loading

obi1kenobi commented May 2, 2023 via email

MarcoIeni commented May 2, 2023

obi1kenobi commented May 2, 2023 via email

MarcoIeni commented May 2, 2023

obi1kenobi commented May 2, 2023

obi1kenobi left a comment

obi1kenobi May 2, 2023

MarcoIeni May 3, 2023

obi1kenobi May 6, 2023

MarcoIeni May 7, 2023

obi1kenobi May 2, 2023

MarcoIeni May 3, 2023

obi1kenobi left a comment

obi1kenobi left a comment

MarcoIeni commented May 7, 2023

		// Create a report for each crate.
		let all_outcomes: anyhow::Result<BTreeMap<String, anyhow::Result<CrateReport>>> =

library: return required update for each crate #398

library: return required update for each crate #398

Conversation

MarcoIeni commented Feb 23, 2023 • edited Loading

obi1kenobi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MarcoIeni commented Feb 25, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

obi1kenobi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MarcoIeni Apr 9, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MarcoIeni commented Apr 9, 2023

obi1kenobi commented Apr 9, 2023

obi1kenobi commented Apr 9, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MarcoIeni commented Apr 26, 2023

obi1kenobi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MarcoIeni commented May 2, 2023

MarcoIeni commented May 2, 2023 • edited Loading

obi1kenobi commented May 2, 2023 via email

MarcoIeni commented May 2, 2023

obi1kenobi commented May 2, 2023 via email

MarcoIeni commented May 2, 2023

obi1kenobi commented May 2, 2023

obi1kenobi 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

obi1kenobi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

obi1kenobi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MarcoIeni commented May 7, 2023

MarcoIeni commented Feb 23, 2023 •

edited

Loading

MarcoIeni Apr 9, 2023 •

edited

Loading

MarcoIeni commented May 2, 2023 •

edited

Loading