Manage embedded fields for API Platform Filter #984

jsamouh · 2017-03-13T08:12:52Z

Q	A
Bug fix?	yes
New feature?	no
BC breaks?	no
Deprecations?	no
Tests pass?	yes
Fixed tickets	#969
License	MIT
Doc PR	N/A

This PR is to aliment a discussion about how to manage embedded fields in API Platform Filter
This PR works form Boolean Filter Only. It works recursively Entity->Embed Fields -> Embed Fields..
No Tests is developped for the moment

soyuka · 2017-03-13T08:28:03Z

src/Bridge/Doctrine/Orm/Filter/AbstractFilter.php

@@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ protected function isPropertyEnabled(string $property): bool
     */
    protected function isPropertyMapped(string $property, string $resourceClass, bool $allowAssociation = false): bool
    {
-        if ($this->isPropertyNested($property)) {
+        if ($this->isPropertyNested($property) && !$this->isPropertyNestedEmbedded($property, $resourceClass)) {


Is this condition valid everytime? I mean, will it break current implementations if we put this inside isPropertyNested so that other filters also benefits from this? Maybe it's just the boolean filter that's impacted, but I doubt that.

Yes it will breaks 👍
If we put the code in isPropertyNested, it disturbs for differents reasons:

1/ it means that a embed field is not considered as a nested field. In fact it is by definition :-)

2/ the function extractProperties in AbstractFilter use isPropertyNested and for an Embed field, it has to be needsFixing to true. Otherwise, it fails for the request.

This code is in AbstractFilter, so any Filter will benefit the code.
Normally the only thing to change for each filter is isBooleanField, isDateField, isNumericField...

Okay got it. I'd add a method that ends up doing $this->isPropertyNested($property) && !$this->isPropertyNestedEmbedded($property, $resourceClass) though. Feel free to add tests.

I do not agree that an Embedded field should be considered a "nested property". isNestedProperty is to help us find out when we need to join.

Agreed ofc. Smth like isPropertyNestedFilterable

@teohhanhui , you're right for that. So We confirm that a nested property concerns only join ?

@teohhanhui @soyuka , what about extractProperties method in the class AbstracFilter ? The property $needsFixing to true. Otherwise the embed field embed_b.field is transformed to embed_b_field and generates an error in the request

Yes, that's the approach that I'd take.

Embedded fields are inlined to the field mapping, apparently (see https://github.com/doctrine/doctrine2/blob/v2.5.6/lib/Doctrine/ORM/Mapping/ClassMetadataInfo.php#L3230-L3264), so there should be no further changes necessary.

Yes, we also need to fix extractProperties. $needsFixing = true for embedded fields. 😄

So you may still find it valuable to extract the logic into, say, isPropertyEmbedded.

jsamouh · 2017-03-13T08:35:11Z

To explain a little bit:

Embed field is a nested property. So it makes sense according to me to recognize this field as a nested property. However, we need to dissociate nestedAssociation versus nestedEmbedded.
So I create the method isPropertyNestedEmbedded in AbstractFilter and apply it when necessary. This functions just needs to know if the Metadata owns this fields. An Embed field is managed like a simple field
I modify a little bit the method isBooleanField in BooleanFilter to retrieve metadata in the same way as the function isPropertyMapped in AbstractFilter
I modify the QueryNameGenerator of API platform to replace . by _ cause it generates an error when we set the parameter (not pretty)
I did not develop isPropertyAssociation cause it costs performance so I prefer to use isPropertyNested and use Negation in the code to know if the property is a nested association

soyuka · 2017-03-13T08:41:47Z

Is this issue limited to the booleanFilter?

jsamouh · 2017-03-13T08:44:00Z

@soyuka , for the moment yes. I'm waiting your feedback before to apply it in any filter and write STRONG tests about this

jsamouh · 2017-03-13T15:40:18Z

@teohhanhui @soyuka , second commit for discussion (apply the code in all filters). No unit and functional tests are developped for the moment. But existing tests success

soyuka · 2017-03-13T15:51:55Z

Better, I'd need @teohhanhui to confirm but I think that we break backward changes by adding $resourceClass. This'll have to target master.

@jordscream would be nice to have a functional test involving those embedded properties. For unit tests, coverage looks fine not sure you'd be able to add much.

jsamouh · 2017-03-13T16:48:20Z

@soyuka , no problem for functionnal test, writing in progress

antograssiot · 2017-03-13T17:36:53Z

In unit test, I might be wrong but I wanted to make sure that the filter description worked ok.

jsamouh · 2017-03-14T15:55:43Z

@soyuka @teohhanhui Why we call dropSchema to execute an insert just after ?
https://github.com/api-platform/core/blob/2.0/features/doctrine/date_filter.feature#L267-L269

soyuka · 2017-03-14T16:00:51Z

dropSchema executes after the scenario is complete (https://github.com/api-platform/core/blob/2.0/features/bootstrap/FeatureContext.php#L88).

Doing this there ensures that the next scenario has a clean database

jsamouh · 2017-03-14T16:01:44Z

@soyuka My apologize....

jsamouh · 2017-03-14T17:10:22Z

@soyuka @teohhanhui I had functionnal tests.

Tell me if it is enough. The most important to me is to test of at least on filter a model like this entity.relation.embed.field.

jsamouh · 2017-03-15T16:36:22Z

@soyuka @teohhanhui any news ? :-)

soyuka · 2017-03-15T16:52:31Z

features/doctrine/date_filter.feature

@@ -394,7 +393,7 @@ Feature: Date filter on collections
    And the header "Content-Type" should be equal to "application/ld+json; charset=utf-8"
    And the JSON should be equal to:
    """
-    {
+      {


Indentation looks wrong here but it's maybe github failing

soyuka · 2017-03-15T16:54:15Z

features/doctrine/date_filter.feature

+    Then the response status code should be 200
+    And the response should be in JSON
+    And the header "Content-Type" should be equal to "application/ld+json; charset=utf-8"
+    And the JSON should be equal to:


Would it be possible to use a schema here instead? Or you can play with JSON node should equal. It's a pain to maintain when we add more filters.

soyuka · 2017-03-15T16:57:31Z

features/main/crud.feature

      }
-    }


Same indentation looks weird here from github POV. This is the maintain mess I'm talking about above :p.

soyuka · 2017-03-15T17:00:14Z

Shit failed the review thing \o/. Anyway great job there! However, this has a BC break and should target master.

jsamouh · 2017-03-15T17:24:35Z

@soyuka @teohhanhui , thanks for your feedback. I gonna check indentation and I will rebase to master.

Just 2 questions:

Why it is a BC breaks ?
@soyuka , can you give me more details about your comment ? I am not sure to understand

Thanks API platform Team !

soyuka · 2017-03-15T17:30:08Z

Why it is a BC breaks ?

Because it alters methods that custom filters might use by extending our AbstractFilter.

For example, I use it with extractProperties, if I update it'll break my code because the second argument is mandatory. There was no argument before. Break.

can you give me more details about your comment ? I am not sure to understand

which one?

jsamouh · 2017-03-15T17:31:41Z

@soyuka Ok , thanks for the explanation

This comment:
Would it be possible to use a schema here instead? Or you can play with JSON node should equal. It's a pain to maintain when we add more filters.

soyuka · 2017-03-15T18:05:10Z

Oh yes, just like you did the other tests, you're using And the JSON should be valid according to this schema: instead of And the JSON should be equal to:.

When I speak about nodes you can write tests like this as well:

And the JSON node "_embedded.item" should have 1 element

jsamouh · 2017-03-16T10:56:23Z

@soyuka , not sure of my modification according your comment but I did it in boolean_filter.feature. Can you tell me if it is ok for you before I modify my other functionnal test ?

thanks

soyuka

The first test is correct, the other ones should match a schema instead of comparing the full json. Nice work!

soyuka · 2017-03-16T10:59:36Z

features/doctrine/boolean_filter.feature

+    Then the response status code should be 200
+    And the response should be in JSON
+    And the header "Content-Type" should be equal to "application/ld+json; charset=utf-8"
+    And the JSON should be equal to:


And the JSON should be valid according to this schema:

soyuka · 2017-03-16T10:59:53Z

features/doctrine/boolean_filter.feature

+    Then the response status code should be 200
+    And the response should be in JSON
+    And the header "Content-Type" should be equal to "application/ld+json; charset=utf-8"
+    And the JSON should be equal to:


And the JSON should be valid according to this schema:

jsamouh · 2017-03-16T11:02:55Z

@soyuka
ah, according your comments , you say to me to do the opposite :-)

Oh yes, just like you did the other tests, you're using And the JSON should be valid according to this schema: instead of And the JSON should be equal to

So I need to replace all my the JSON should be equal to by And the JSON should be valid according to this schema ?

soyuka · 2017-03-16T11:09:42Z

Oh sorry about this, rephrasing :

use schema instead of full json equality for the sake of maintainability.

Really sorry that you misunderstood this I was just doing too many things at once yesterday and speaking 3 languages at the same time makes it hard to write comprehensible things sometimes :|.

jsamouh · 2017-04-18T21:26:58Z

@soyuka , I revert my change about functional test to not alter the existing functional test
Let me know if it is okay for you

soyuka · 2017-04-19T06:30:18Z

tests/Fixtures/app/config/config.yml

        tags:      [ { name: 'api_platform.filter', id: 'my_dummy.search' } ]

    # Tests if the id default to the service name, do not add id attributes here
    my_dummy.order:
        parent:    'api_platform.doctrine.orm.order_filter'
-        arguments: [ { 'id': ~, 'name': 'desc', 'relatedDummy.symfony': ~ } ]
-        tags:      [ { name: 'api_platform.filter' } ]
+        arguments: [ { 'id': ~, 'name': 'desc', 'relatedDummy.name': ~, 'embeddedDummy.dummyName': 'desc' } ]


you removed relatedDummy.symfony order, I assume this is wanted? As long as tests pass it's ok to me 👍

soyuka · 2017-04-19T06:31:09Z

php-cs-fixer failed, you can check the diff on travis

jsamouh · 2017-04-21T14:47:01Z

@soyuka done (normally)

meyerbaptiste

Fix my comments and phpstan should be happy!

meyerbaptiste · 2017-04-21T22:40:52Z

src/Bridge/Doctrine/Orm/Filter/AbstractFilter.php

+            if (__CLASS__ !== get_class($this)) {
+                $r = new \ReflectionMethod($this, __FUNCTION__);
+                if (__CLASS__ !== $r->getDeclaringClass()->getName()) {
+                    @trigger_error(sprintf('Method %s() will have a two `$resourceClass` argument in version API Platform 3.0. Not defining it is deprecated since API Platform 2.1.', get_class($this), __FUNCTION__), E_USER_DEPRECATED);


Your sprintf() has too many args.

meyerbaptiste · 2017-04-21T22:41:08Z

src/Bridge/Doctrine/Orm/Filter/AbstractFilter.php

+            if (__CLASS__ !== get_class($this)) {
+                $r = new \ReflectionMethod($this, __FUNCTION__);
+                if (__CLASS__ !== $r->getDeclaringClass()->getName()) {
+                    @trigger_error(sprintf('Method %s() will have a two `$resourceClass` argument in version API Platform 3.0. Not defining it is deprecated since API Platform 2.1.', get_class($this), __FUNCTION__), E_USER_DEPRECATED);


Your sprintf() has too many args.

meyerbaptiste · 2017-04-21T22:41:22Z

src/Bridge/Doctrine/Orm/Filter/AbstractFilter.php

+            if (__CLASS__ !== get_class($this)) {
+                $r = new \ReflectionMethod($this, __FUNCTION__);
+                if (__CLASS__ !== $r->getDeclaringClass()->getName()) {
+                    @trigger_error(sprintf('Method %s() will have a two `$resourceClass` argument in version API Platform 3.0. Not defining it is deprecated since API Platform 2.1.', get_class($this), __FUNCTION__), E_USER_DEPRECATED);


Your sprintf() has too many args.

meyerbaptiste · 2017-04-21T22:41:38Z

src/Bridge/Doctrine/Orm/Filter/AbstractFilter.php

+            if (__CLASS__ !== get_class($this)) {
+                $r = new \ReflectionMethod($this, __FUNCTION__);
+                if (__CLASS__ !== $r->getDeclaringClass()->getName()) {
+                    @trigger_error(sprintf('Method %s() will have a two `$resourceClass` argument in version API Platform 3.0. Not defining it is deprecated since API Platform 2.1.', get_class($this), __FUNCTION__), E_USER_DEPRECATED);


Your sprintf() has too many args.

meyerbaptiste · 2017-04-21T22:41:48Z

src/Bridge/Doctrine/Orm/Filter/AbstractFilter.php

+            if (__CLASS__ !== get_class($this)) {
+                $r = new \ReflectionMethod($this, __FUNCTION__);
+                if (__CLASS__ !== $r->getDeclaringClass()->getName()) {
+                    @trigger_error(sprintf('Method %s() will have a two `$resourceClass` argument in version API Platform 3.0. Not defining it is deprecated since API Platform 2.1.', get_class($this), __FUNCTION__), E_USER_DEPRECATED);


Your sprintf() has too many args.

jsamouh · 2017-04-28T23:38:26Z

@soyuka travis/appveyor failed is really linked to what i did ?

soyuka · 2017-04-29T12:37:37Z

@jordscream yeah you added an embeddedDummy property I think. It fails on the following equality:

          {
            "@id": "/related_dummies/1",
            "@type": "https://schema.org/Product",
            "id": 1,
            "name": "Hello",
            "symfony": "symfony",
            "dummyDate": null,
            "thirdLevel": "/third_levels/1",
            "relatedToDummyFriend": [],
            "dummyBoolean": null,
            "age": null
          },

              {
                  "@id": "\/related_dummies\/1",
                  "@type": "https:\/\/schema.org\/Product",
                  "id": 1,
                  "name": "Hello",
                  "symfony": "symfony",
                  "dummyDate": null,
                  "thirdLevel": "\/third_levels\/1",
                  "relatedToDummyFriend": [],
                  "dummyBoolean": null,
                  "embeddedDummy": [],
                  "age": null
              },

teohhanhui · 2017-05-12T10:55:41Z

src/Bridge/Doctrine/Orm/Filter/AbstractFilter.php

+            if (__CLASS__ !== get_class($this)) {
+                $r = new \ReflectionMethod($this, __FUNCTION__);
+                if (__CLASS__ !== $r->getDeclaringClass()->getName()) {
+                    @trigger_error(sprintf('Method %s() will have a two `$resourceClass` argument in version API Platform 3.0. Not defining it is deprecated since API Platform 2.1.', __FUNCTION__), E_USER_DEPRECATED);


will have a ~~two~~ second argument

teohhanhui · 2017-05-12T10:55:46Z

src/Bridge/Doctrine/Orm/Filter/AbstractFilter.php

+            if (__CLASS__ !== get_class($this)) {
+                $r = new \ReflectionMethod($this, __FUNCTION__);
+                if (__CLASS__ !== $r->getDeclaringClass()->getName()) {
+                    @trigger_error(sprintf('Method %s() will have a two `$resourceClass` argument in version API Platform 3.0. Not defining it is deprecated since API Platform 2.1.', __FUNCTION__), E_USER_DEPRECATED);


will have a ~~two~~ second argument

teohhanhui · 2017-05-12T10:55:55Z

src/Bridge/Doctrine/Orm/Filter/AbstractFilter.php

+            if (__CLASS__ !== get_class($this)) {
+                $r = new \ReflectionMethod($this, __FUNCTION__);
+                if (__CLASS__ !== $r->getDeclaringClass()->getName()) {
+                    @trigger_error(sprintf('Method %s() will have a two `$resourceClass` argument in version API Platform 3.0. Not defining it is deprecated since API Platform 2.1.', __FUNCTION__), E_USER_DEPRECATED);


will have a ~~two~~ second argument

teohhanhui · 2017-05-12T10:56:03Z

src/Bridge/Doctrine/Orm/Filter/AbstractFilter.php

+            if (__CLASS__ !== get_class($this)) {
+                $r = new \ReflectionMethod($this, __FUNCTION__);
+                if (__CLASS__ !== $r->getDeclaringClass()->getName()) {
+                    @trigger_error(sprintf('Method %s() will have a two `$resourceClass` argument in version API Platform 3.0. Not defining it is deprecated since API Platform 2.1.', __FUNCTION__), E_USER_DEPRECATED);


will have a ~~two~~ second argument

teohhanhui · 2017-05-12T10:56:09Z

src/Bridge/Doctrine/Orm/Filter/AbstractFilter.php

+            if (__CLASS__ !== get_class($this)) {
+                $r = new \ReflectionMethod($this, __FUNCTION__);
+                if (__CLASS__ !== $r->getDeclaringClass()->getName()) {
+                    @trigger_error(sprintf('Method %s() will have a two `$resourceClass` argument in version API Platform 3.0. Not defining it is deprecated since API Platform 2.1.', __FUNCTION__), E_USER_DEPRECATED);


will have a ~~two~~ second argument

teohhanhui · 2017-05-12T10:58:18Z

tests/Fixtures/TestBundle/Entity/EmbeddableDummy.php

+<?php
+
+declare(strict_types=1);
+/*


There should be a blank line here.

teohhanhui · 2017-05-12T10:58:37Z

tests/Fixtures/TestBundle/Entity/EmbeddedDummy.php

@@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
+<?php
+
+declare(strict_types=1);


There should be a blank line here.

blaues0cke · 2017-05-15T13:23:43Z

Just FYI: Pointed a project I worked on for over 4 months to this pull request and everything (including the filters on embedded entities) worked like a charm without any error at all!

dunglas · 2017-05-15T13:59:13Z

@jordscream do you think you can handle the last few comments?

jsamouh · 2017-05-15T14:08:22Z

@dunglas , yes will do this week :-)

soyuka · 2017-05-23T14:07:44Z

@jordscream just so you know (and you don't force push 😛) I fixed the last comments and rebased against master :).

dunglas · 2017-05-23T15:07:30Z

Thanks @jordscream and @soyuka!

meyerbaptiste

Arf too late!

meyerbaptiste · 2017-05-23T14:51:04Z

features/bootstrap/FeatureContext.php

+     */
+    public function thereIsDummyObjectsWithEmbeddedDummyBoolean($nb, $bool)
+    {
+        if (in_array($bool, ['true', '1', 1], true)) {


What about filter_var($bool, FILTER_VALIDATE_BOOLEAN)?

if (null === $bool = filter_var($bool, FILTER_VALIDATE_BOOLEAN) { throw new ...; }

This wasn't part of this PR or was it? I think there was a reason we didn't use that. I'll look into this.

It was and I don't see any reason 😛

Okay so did some digging. This actually comes from #1010 and I used the same code as we already use in the BooleanFilter for consistency.

"on" / "off" support in boolean filter was removed. That's where this modification is comming from IIRC

Note that I'm sure we talked about FILTER_VALIDATE_BOOLEAN when working on the boolean filter, IIRC it was with @teohhanhui.

Hmm, I don't see what can block here. We're not talking about a filter but a setter. It's just a step definition with an argument which is converted to a pure boolean in all cases! So why couldn't we use FILTER_VALIDATE_BOOLEAN?🤔

Sure, can add it to my todolist.

Can we all stop using filter_var, please? 😞 Burn it with fire!

Maybe with some explanations! 😛

meyerbaptiste · 2017-05-23T14:54:27Z

features/doctrine/order_filter.feature

@@ -331,7 +331,7 @@ Feature: Order filter on collections
              "properties": {
                "@id": {
                  "type": "string",
-                  "pattern": "^/dummies/2$"
+                  "pattern": "^/dummies/2"


meyerbaptiste · 2017-05-23T15:07:26Z

features/main/crud.feature

@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ Feature: Create-Retrieve-Update-Delete
    And the header "Content-Type" should be equal to "application/ld+json; charset=utf-8"
    And the JSON should be equal to:
    """
-    {
+		{


Indentation!

Thanks, rebasing behat features is a mess. Fixed in #1137

jsamouh · 2017-05-23T19:47:06Z

@soyuka @dunglas sorry for my late
Cool to have merged :-)

…d-filter Manage embedded fields for API Platform Filter

jsamouh changed the title ~~Manage embedded fields for BooleanFilter~~ Manage embedded fields for API Platform Filter Mar 13, 2017

soyuka reviewed Mar 13, 2017

View reviewed changes

jsamouh force-pushed the nested-embed-field-filter branch 2 times, most recently from 572a083 to 08f0acb Compare March 13, 2017 15:36

jsamouh force-pushed the nested-embed-field-filter branch from 08f0acb to 2d95b70 Compare March 14, 2017 17:05

soyuka reviewed Mar 15, 2017

View reviewed changes

jsamouh force-pushed the nested-embed-field-filter branch from 2d95b70 to 9b4ef0f Compare March 16, 2017 10:54

soyuka requested changes Mar 16, 2017

View reviewed changes

jsamouh force-pushed the nested-embed-field-filter branch from 7f5a2d7 to 4090a85 Compare April 18, 2017 21:25

soyuka reviewed Apr 19, 2017

View reviewed changes

jsamouh force-pushed the nested-embed-field-filter branch 2 times, most recently from 462ee9d to 40cf084 Compare April 21, 2017 14:46

meyerbaptiste requested changes Apr 21, 2017

View reviewed changes

jsamouh force-pushed the nested-embed-field-filter branch from 02370a1 to 61ec985 Compare April 28, 2017 18:34

teohhanhui mentioned this pull request May 12, 2017

Filter not working with embedded properties (multiple levels) api-platform/api-platform#297

Closed

teohhanhui suggested changes May 12, 2017

View reviewed changes

soyuka force-pushed the nested-embed-field-filter branch 3 times, most recently from b7d48bf to c29a322 Compare May 23, 2017 13:59

Manage Embedded Fields

5dc1b08

soyuka force-pushed the nested-embed-field-filter branch from c29a322 to 5dc1b08 Compare May 23, 2017 14:36

soyuka approved these changes May 23, 2017

View reviewed changes

dunglas approved these changes May 23, 2017

View reviewed changes

dunglas merged commit 8ed3bdc into api-platform:master May 23, 2017

meyerbaptiste reviewed May 23, 2017

View reviewed changes

teohhanhui mentioned this pull request Jun 2, 2017

Deprecation in the form of new arguments not handled properly #1153

Closed

hoangnd25 pushed a commit to hoangnd25/core that referenced this pull request Feb 23, 2018

Merge pull request api-platform#984 from jordscream/nested-embed-fiel…

ff2fa6f

…d-filter Manage embedded fields for API Platform Filter

Uh oh!

Manage embedded fields for API Platform Filter #984

Manage embedded fields for API Platform Filter #984

Uh oh!

Conversation

jsamouh commented Mar 13, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jsamouh Mar 13, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jsamouh commented Mar 13, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

soyuka commented Mar 13, 2017

Uh oh!

jsamouh commented Mar 13, 2017

Uh oh!

jsamouh commented Mar 13, 2017

Uh oh!

soyuka commented Mar 13, 2017

Uh oh!

jsamouh commented Mar 13, 2017

Uh oh!

antograssiot commented Mar 13, 2017

Uh oh!

jsamouh commented Mar 14, 2017

Uh oh!

soyuka commented Mar 14, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jsamouh commented Mar 14, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jsamouh commented Mar 14, 2017

Uh oh!

jsamouh commented Mar 15, 2017

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

soyuka Mar 15, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

soyuka Mar 15, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

soyuka commented Mar 15, 2017

Uh oh!

jsamouh commented Mar 15, 2017

Uh oh!

soyuka commented Mar 15, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jsamouh commented Mar 15, 2017

Uh oh!

soyuka commented Mar 15, 2017

Uh oh!

jsamouh commented Mar 16, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

jsamouh commented Mar 13, 2017 •

edited

Loading

jsamouh Mar 13, 2017 •

edited

Loading

jsamouh commented Mar 13, 2017 •

edited

Loading

soyuka commented Mar 14, 2017 •

edited

Loading

jsamouh commented Mar 14, 2017 •

edited

Loading

soyuka Mar 15, 2017 •

edited

Loading

soyuka Mar 15, 2017 •

edited

Loading

soyuka commented Mar 15, 2017 •

edited

Loading

jsamouh commented Mar 16, 2017 •

edited

Loading