feat: support to run multi script commands specified with regex selector #5871

Shinyaigeek · 2023-01-02T14:26:51Z

Ticket

Details

support function to run multiple script commands specified with RegExp selector like /build:.*/.

If you run pnpm run /build:.*/, matched build:css, build:html, build:js... will be fired, and unmatched lint:css, start will not be fired. You can also specify --max-parallel option to specify number of limits to run scripts specified with a wildcard script selector parallel. --max-parallel default value is 1 (= sequential). If you specify --max-parallel 2, pnpm runs matched script commands parallel 2 each.

RegExp flags like /~~/ig are not supported because flags are not useful.

Tests

in this repository.

run cd b && pd run build:*

// output
> b@1.0.0 build:css /Users/shinobuhayashi/Documents/pnpm-playground-run-scripts/b
> sleep 1 && echo 'build b css'

build b css

> b@1.0.0 build:js /Users/shinobuhayashi/Documents/pnpm-playground-run-scripts/b
> sleep 1 && echo 'build b js'

build b js

> b@1.0.0 build:html /Users/shinobuhayashi/Documents/pnpm-playground-run-scripts/b
> sleep 1 && echo 'build b html'

build b html

run cd b && pd run --max-parallel 3 build:*

// output
> b@1.0.0 build:css /Users/shinobuhayashi/Documents/pnpm-playground-run-scripts/b
> sleep 1 && echo 'build b css'


> b@1.0.0 build:js /Users/shinobuhayashi/Documents/pnpm-playground-run-scripts/b
> sleep 1 && echo 'build b js'


> b@1.0.0 build:html /Users/shinobuhayashi/Documents/pnpm-playground-run-scripts/b
> sleep 1 && echo 'build b html'

build b css
build b js
build b html

run pd --filter * build:*

// output
a build:css$ sleep 1 && echo 'build a css'
│ build a css
└─ Done in 1s
b build:css$ sleep 1 && echo 'build b css'
│ build b css
└─ Done in 1s
b build:js$ sleep 1 && echo 'build b js'
│ build b js
└─ Done in 1s
a build:js$ sleep 1 && echo 'build a js'
│ build a js
└─ Done in 1s
a build:html$ sleep 1 && echo 'build a html'
│ build a html
└─ Done in 1s
b build:html$ sleep 1 && echo 'build b html'
│ build b html
└─ Done in 1s

My worries points

Should we support a wildcard selector in the middle?

As the above description, I considered supporting selectors like XXX:*:YYYY in the second example, but I felt this will cause an unnecessary complexity for a small number of use cases, so I only support selectors ending with :* in the current implementation, but should we support this feature?

Should we separate this wildcard script selector from run, run-script command?

In the current implementation, the wildcard script selector is supported in run and run-script command, but It seems also good to create a new run-all command for this wildcard script selector, and not support the wildcard script selector in run and run-script command. (but run-all command may cause unnecessary complexity…)

balance for the number to run in parallel

pnpm supports workspace function, and pnpm runs scripts in matched workspaces with —filter options parallel. The number of limits of this parallel script execution over workspaces is specified with workspace-concurrency. I was wondering about the balance of the number of limits for parallel execution between parallel script execution over workspace and parallel script execution with wildcard script selector.

In the current implementation, the number of limits of parallel execution is ${—max-parallel} * ${workspace-concurrency}, but I felt this is confusing perhaps...

how to persist log grouping per workspace?

In the current implementation, pnpm invokes runLifecycleHook module for each the matched scripts with workpsace filtering with —filter option and a wildcard script selector filtering and runLifecycleHook module initializes npmLog function instance per call (https://github.com/pnpm/pnpm/blob/main/exec/lifecycle/src/runLifecycleHook.ts#L91), so npmLog function outputs logs separately and log grouping per workspace does not work like the below screenshot.

In my understanding, pnpm writes log output to Rx.ObservableContext and logs it to the command line, structured with cli/default-reporter.

It is necessary to write the log of the execution of the script matched by the wildcard script selector in the same log context per workspace without destroying the existing context in order to support log grouping per workspace. I could not come up with a way to realize it…Do you know how to do it? (Or maybe it's fine as it is now...?)

Should we support / symbol to separate the structure of a wildcard script selector?

In the current implementation, only : symbol is supported to separate the structure of a wildcard script selector, so XXX:* works but XXX/* does not work. I felt that supporting also / symbol will cause unnecessary complexity, but should I support this?

Should we support regex script selector?

I did not implement script selector with regex because I felt this will cause an unnecessary complexity for a small number of use cases, but should I support this?

Shinyaigeek · 2023-01-02T14:44:32Z

This has still be a POC implementation, so I want your review about CLI interface (current test implementation: https://github.com/pnpm/pnpm/pull/5871/files#diff-377d96dc16ff022df679d40d7013036cc4489527234eabeebf2e91e8afa86eea) and my worries 🙏

zkochan · 2023-01-03T00:45:02Z

Should we support a wildcard selector in the middle?

no

Should we separate this wildcard script selector from run, run-script command?

no

balance for the number to run in parallel

I don't understand why would you need separate concurrency setting for this. Just use the already existing one.

how to persist log grouping per workspace?

I think it is OK to keep the way it is logged now.

Should we support / symbol to separate the structure of a wildcard script selector?

I don't think other separators should be supported.

Should we support regex script selector?

I don't think it is needed.

zkochan · 2023-01-03T01:07:50Z

exec/plugin-commands-script-runners/test/index.ts

+    },
+  })
+
+  await execa('pnpm', ['add', 'json-append@1'])


why do you need to use json-append for these tests? json-append is useful if you want to check the sequence of the scripts. You can append items to the same file. But you use different files, so you can just create empty files.

like

'build:c': 'node -e "require('fs').writeFileSync('a', '', 'utf8')"',

Certainly, I used json-append just because other unit tests use this. b92e3bb 👍

zkochan · 2023-01-03T01:10:11Z

exec/plugin-commands-script-runners/src/run.ts

@@ -53,6 +54,7 @@ export function rcOptionsTypes () {
      'npm-path',
      'use-node-version',
    ], allTypes),
+    'max-parallel': Number,


why is it needed if there is already a workspace-concurrency setting?

https://pnpm.io/cli/recursive#--workspace-concurrency

Set the maximum number of tasks to run simultaneously. For unlimited concurrency use Infinity.

Certainly, s reading this description, —max-parallel is not needed. I fixed in f256571 👍 I misunderstood —workspace-concurrency option is just for recursive run and run with —filter option command.

By the above commit, pnpm runs selected scripts parallel with the number of limit specified with workspace-concurrency. In running scripts specified with both of a wildcard selector and —filter workspace selector, pnpm flattens specified script commands and runs these from top to bottom.

eg)

In the below package,

a workspace:

build:1 script

build:2 script

build:3 script

b workspace:

build:1 script

build:2 script

build:3 script

and run pnpm --filter '*' run 'build:*', pnpm flattens commands to execute into [ a workspace's build:1 script, a workspace's build:2 script, a workspace's build3 script, b workspace's build:1 script, b workspace's build:2 script, b workspace's build:3 script ] and execute these from top to bottom.

514986f

Additionally, I make pnpm run command without recursive execute specified scripts parallel with the number of limit 4 as a default behavior, because pnpm run command with recursive execute scripts parallel with the number of limit 4 as a default behavior and these should be the same.

So pnpm run with a wildcard script selector executes specified script parallel as a default behavior, so I implemented --sequential shorthand option. This shorthand option will specify --workspace-concurrency=1

Shinyaigeek · 2023-01-03T08:44:15Z

Thank you for answering my worries!! OK, I am relieved that there is not much difference from your opinion 😄

Shinyaigeek · 2023-01-03T08:49:58Z

By the way, what do you think about supporting , separator such as pnpm run ‘build:*, lint:* to run all scripts which name start with build: or lint:. (npm-run-all supports this.)

In my opinion, at least , separator should be implemented in the other PR (whether it is necessary or not). It may be good to support this feature if requests to support this come.

…module

…ified with selector

…fied with selector in recursive

…rkspace-concurrency

zkochan · 2023-01-05T00:37:12Z

If you want that, then maybe a regex should be used instead.

Shinyaigeek · 2023-01-07T04:05:55Z

If you want that, then maybe a regex should be used instead.

I did not have a strong reason not to use RegExp, so I fixed to use it 👍 bd0aef2

zkochan

I don't see new tests that verify matching multiple different script names.

zkochan · 2023-01-08T15:44:25Z

exec/plugin-commands-script-runners/src/run.ts

@@ -159,7 +170,13 @@ export async function handler (
      : undefined
    return printProjectCommands(manifest, rootManifest ?? undefined)
  }
-  if (scriptName !== 'start' && !manifest.scripts?.[scriptName]) {
+
+  const multiScriptSelectorSpecified = scriptName.slice(-2) === ':*'


I don't understand this. You switched to a regex but still use :*? How so?

For example, a regular expression build without wildcard selector will match build:css and this is against intention. Therefore, I left this boolean to determine if it is wildcard mode or not.

However I rethought about it and this behavior is against intention as above description and if we want to use RegExp for script matching, a detailed condition judgement process is needed and I thought it is clearer and more maintainable to match script name with simple string prefix matching ( startsWith ) instaed of matching with RegExp so I revert the commit to switch to regex in 7608448.

After all, multiScriptSelectorSpecified is still needed whether RegExp is used or not. (In the current implementation, RegExp is not used after all.)

This reverts commit bd0aef2.

Shinyaigeek · 2023-01-09T15:39:39Z

I don't see new tests that verify matching multiple different script names.

Hmm…I added some unit tests for verifying matching multiple different script names in 776dd24. Should I also add e2e tests? (which I did not implement from a cost perspective)

zkochan · 2023-01-11T10:32:02Z

But you wanted to match different script names to run both build:* and lint:* with the same command. I don't see such tests.

zkochan · 2023-01-28T17:27:29Z

exec/plugin-commands-script-runners/src/runRecursive.ts

@@ -164,3 +161,18 @@ export async function runRecursive (

  throwOnCommandFail('pnpm recursive run', result)
 }
+
+function getSpecifiedScripts (scripts: PackageScripts, scriptName: string) {


why is this function not the same as in run.ts?

In my understanding, pnpm executes node server.js in pnpm run start even if start script is not defined in package.json. I can find the logic to do so in run.ts but I cannot in runRecursive.ts. This diff is occurred from this diff

Perhaps we could add a function parameter for controlling this behavior?

No parameter is needed. It is better to write another wrapper for run.st, which will include the logic for start.

It is also a solution.

I fixed the code to wrap runRecursive getSpecifiedScripts in `run.tsP

zkochan · 2023-01-28T17:27:54Z

.changeset/silly-flies-care.md

+"@pnpm/plugin-commands-script-runners": minor
+---
+
+feat: support wildcard selector to specify multiple scripts to execute"


add more details. This text is going to be on the release page.

4802e46 👍

zkochan · 2023-01-28T17:28:08Z

.changeset/silly-flies-care.md

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+---
+"@pnpm/plugin-commands-script-runners": minor


also add pnpm: minor

4802e46 👍

zkochan · 2023-01-28T17:28:58Z

exec/plugin-commands-script-runners/src/run.ts

@@ -43,13 +45,21 @@ export const RESUME_FROM_OPTION_HELP = {
  name: '--resume-from',
 }

+export const SEQUENTIAL_OPTION_HELP = {
+  description: 'Run specified scripts one after one.',


Suggested change

description: 'Run specified scripts one after one.',

description: 'Run specified scripts one by one',

👍 Thanks!

exec/plugin-commands-script-runners/src/regexpCommand.ts

BlackHole1 · 2023-01-29T09:25:40Z

exec/plugin-commands-script-runners/src/runRecursive.ts

@@ -164,3 +161,18 @@ export async function runRecursive (

  throwOnCommandFail('pnpm recursive run', result)
 }
+
+function getSpecifiedScripts (scripts: PackageScripts, scriptName: string) {


Perhaps we could add a function parameter for controlling this behavior?

BlackHole1 · 2023-01-29T09:29:52Z

exec/plugin-commands-script-runners/src/run.ts

+  const scriptSelector = tryBuildRegExpFromCommand(scriptName)
+
+  // if scriptName which a user passes is RegExp (like /build:.*/), multiple scripts to execute will be selected with RegExp
+  if (scriptSelector) {
+    const scriptKeys = Object.keys(scripts)
+    return scriptKeys.filter(script => script.match(scriptSelector))
+  }
+
+  // if scripts in package.json has script which is equal to scriptName a user passes, return it.
+  if (scripts[scriptName]) {
+    return [scriptName]
+  }
+
+  // if a user passes start command as scriptName, `node server.js` will be executed as a fallback, so return start command even if start command is not defined in package.json
+  if (scriptName === 'start') {
+    return [scriptName]
+  }
+
+  return []


We should do the complicated stuff last because in the vast majority of cases it is scripts[scriptName].

Suggested change

const scriptSelector = tryBuildRegExpFromCommand(scriptName)

// if scriptName which a user passes is RegExp (like /build:.*/), multiple scripts to execute will be selected with RegExp

if (scriptSelector) {

const scriptKeys = Object.keys(scripts)

return scriptKeys.filter(script => script.match(scriptSelector))

}

// if scripts in package.json has script which is equal to scriptName a user passes, return it.

if (scripts[scriptName]) {

return [scriptName]

}

// if a user passes start command as scriptName, `node server.js` will be executed as a fallback, so return start command even if start command is not defined in package.json

if (scriptName === 'start') {

return [scriptName]

}

return []

// if scripts in package.json has script which is equal to scriptName a user passes, return it.

if (scripts[scriptName]) {

return [scriptName]

}

// if a user passes start command as scriptName, `node server.js` will be executed as a fallback, so return start command even if start command is not defined in package.json

if (scriptName === 'start') {

return [scriptName]

}

// if scriptName which a user passes is RegExp (like /build:.*/), multiple scripts to execute will be selected with RegExp

const scriptSelector = tryBuildRegExpFromCommand(scriptName)

if (scriptSelector) {

return Object.keys(scripts).filter(script => script.match(scriptSelector))

}

return []

Indeed. acf55fd

BlackHole1 · 2023-01-29T09:48:29Z

exec/plugin-commands-script-runners/src/regexpCommand.ts

+  if (command.length < 3) {
+    return null
+  }
+  if (command[0] !== '/' || command.lastIndexOf('/') < 1) {
+    return null
+  }
+  try {
+    return new RegExp(command.slice(0, command.lastIndexOf('/')).slice(1))
+  } catch {
+    return null
+  }


Support /x/imgy.

Suggested change

if (command.length < 3) {

return null

}

if (command[0] !== '/' || command.lastIndexOf('/') < 1) {

return null

}

try {

return new RegExp(command.slice(0, command.lastIndexOf('/')).slice(1))

} catch {

return null

}

// https://github.com/stdlib-js/regexp-regexp/blob/6428051ac9ef7c9d03468b19bdbb1dc6fc2a5509/lib/regexp.js

const isRegExpStr = /^\/((?:\\\/|[^\/])+)\/([imgy]*)$/.test(command)

if (!isRegExpStr) {

return null

}

// https://stackoverflow.com/a/874742/6596777

const match = command.match(new RegExp('^/(.*?)/([imgy]*)$'))

if (!match) {

return null

}

try {

return new RegExp(match[1], match[2])

} catch {

return null

}

Ref:

https://github.com/stdlib-js/regexp-regexp/blob/6428051ac9ef7c9d03468b19bdbb1dc6fc2a5509/lib/regexp.js

https://stackoverflow.com/a/874742/6596777

There are other flac chalactor to present flag https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/RegExp/flags other than imy, and these are defined in EcmaScript RegExp specification. I think it is hard to keep up with RegExp flag for ecmascript starndart so it is better to simply split wih /

Good catch! I have modified the code:

// https://github.com/stdlib-js/regexp-regexp/blob/6428051ac9ef7c9d03468b19bdbb1dc6fc2a5509/lib/regexp.js const isRegExpStr = /^\/((?:\\\/|[^\/])+)\/([dgimuys]*)$/.test(command) if (!isRegExpStr) { return null } // https://stackoverflow.com/a/874742/6596777 const match = command.match(new RegExp('^/(.*?)/([dgimuys]*)$')) if (!match) { return null } try { return new RegExp(match[1], match[2]) } catch { return null }

Result:

console.log(/build:.*/dgimuys.test("build:web")) // true

Excess flags do not affect the results.

Ref: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Guide/Regular_Expressions#advanced_searching_with_flags

In what case would regex flags be useful? A regex is already more powerful than it needs to be for this simple task of selecting scripts.

Actually, only the i flags are useful. But if flags are not supported, I think it's fine.

We need to discuss what will happen if the user types pnpm run /build:*/ig:

Ingore flags and print warning

Ignore flags

Report an error

Consider this as scriptName

Consider this as Regex flags.

If ignore flags:

// https://github.com/stdlib-js/regexp-regexp/blob/6428051ac9ef7c9d03468b19bdbb1dc6fc2a5509/lib/regexp.js const reRegExp = new RegExp(/^\/((?:\\\/|[^\/])+)\/([dgimuys]*)$/) const match = command.match(reRegExp) if (!match) { return null } // if need print warning if (match[2]) { logger.warn("not support flags and will ignore") } try { return new RegExp(match[1]) } catch { return null }

If support flags:

// https://github.com/stdlib-js/regexp-regexp/blob/6428051ac9ef7c9d03468b19bdbb1dc6fc2a5509/lib/regexp.js const reRegExp = new RegExp(/^\/((?:\\\/|[^\/])+)\/([dgimuys]*)$/) const match = command.match(reRegExp) if (!match) { return null } try { return new RegExp(match[1], match[2]) } catch { return null }

I'd vote for either reporting an error or consider it as script name. Although the second one may be confusing

I would like to vote for reporting an error or ignoring flag and warning it.

I'd vote for ignoring the flags and warning it.

I updated the tryBuildRegExpFromCommand to report the error if RegExp flag is specified in the passed script command 67f62a1 👍

zkochan · 2023-01-29T20:52:28Z

Some tests are failing.

BlackHole1 · 2023-01-30T03:50:17Z

exec/plugin-commands-script-runners/src/run.ts

+function getSpecifiedScripts (scripts: PackageScripts, scriptName: string) {
+  const specifiedSelector = getSpecifiedScripts(scripts, scriptName)


CI failed.

https://github.com/pnpm/pnpm/actions/runs/4037841963/jobs/6941420302#step:10:2436

Sorry 🙏 I fixed the code to fix CI error

BlackHole1

nit

BlackHole1 · 2023-02-01T00:57:55Z

exec/plugin-commands-script-runners/src/runRecursive.ts

+  const scriptSelector = tryBuildRegExpFromCommand(scriptName)
+
+  // if scripts in package.json has script which is equal to scriptName a user passes, return it.
+  if (scripts[scriptName]) {
+    return [scriptName]
+  }
+


First scripts[scriptName] then tryBuildRegExpFromCommand

Good Catch! Thanks! 46522b3

BlackHole1 · 2023-02-01T01:45:07Z

exec/plugin-commands-script-runners/test/index.ts

+  } catch (_err: any) { // eslint-disable-line
+    err = _err
+  }
+  expect(err.message).toBe('RegExp flag is not supported in script command selector')


@zkochan Ref: d9bd169

1485f79 👍

…nal syntax

BlackHole1

LGTM

Shinyaigeek requested a review from zkochan as a code owner January 2, 2023 14:26

Shinyaigeek self-assigned this Jan 2, 2023

Shinyaigeek added type: feature area: lifecycle-scripts area: cli labels Jan 2, 2023

zkochan reviewed Jan 3, 2023

View reviewed changes

Shinyaigeek force-pushed the feature/task-runner branch from 42b80b3 to fdedd17 Compare January 3, 2023 08:21

Shinyaigeek requested a review from zkochan January 3, 2023 08:50

Shinyaigeek added 8 commits January 4, 2023 20:48

refactor: extract the process to run script command into a separated …

413fb09

…module

feat: run script command parallel if multiple script commands is spec…

fd2ebe5

…ified with selector

feat: run script command parallel if multiple script command is speci…

25fae54

…fied with selector in recursive

test: run unit test for multi script commands selector

776dd24

fixup! test: run unit test for multi script commands selector

8424515

feat: run selected scripts parallel with the limits specified with wo…

f256571

…rkspace-concurrency

fixup! test: run unit test for multi script commands selector

b92e3bb

feat: run multi scripts parallel per 4 as a default behavior

514986f

Shinyaigeek force-pushed the feature/task-runner branch from fdedd17 to 514986f Compare January 4, 2023 11:49

Shinyaigeek added 2 commits January 7, 2023 13:03

fix: use regexp for multi scripts wildcard selector

bd0aef2

chore: add changeset

b7e6428

zkochan reviewed Jan 8, 2023

View reviewed changes

Revert "fix: use regexp for multi scripts wildcard selector"

7608448

This reverts commit bd0aef2.

fixup! test: run unit test for multi script commands selector

ec8e4ee

fixup! fixup! fix: use regexp selector instaed of original syntax

c02be84

Shinyaigeek force-pushed the feature/task-runner branch from 39f3152 to c02be84 Compare January 28, 2023 04:34

zkochan reviewed Jan 28, 2023

View reviewed changes

fixup! chore: add changeset

4802e46

Shinyaigeek force-pushed the feature/task-runner branch from d2b73fc to 4802e46 Compare January 29, 2023 08:04

Shinyaigeek requested a review from zkochan January 29, 2023 08:05

BlackHole1 requested changes Jan 29, 2023

View reviewed changes

Shinyaigeek added 3 commits January 30, 2023 00:12

fixup! fix: use regexp selector instaed of original syntax

421a693

fixup! fix: use regexp selector instaed of original syntax

7db6957

fixup! fixup! fix: use regexp selector instaed of original syntax

acf55fd

BlackHole1 requested changes Jan 30, 2023

View reviewed changes

fixup! fixup! fixup! fix: use regexp selector instaed of original syntax

cbc19e7

Shinyaigeek force-pushed the feature/task-runner branch from 0049863 to c93730e Compare January 30, 2023 12:33

fixup! fixup! fixup! fix: use regexp selector instaed of original syntax

0d81ca4

Shinyaigeek force-pushed the feature/task-runner branch from c93730e to 0d81ca4 Compare January 30, 2023 12:34

Shinyaigeek requested a review from BlackHole1 January 30, 2023 13:43

Shinyaigeek added 2 commits January 31, 2023 23:29

fix: update test description for regexp script selector

2b337da

fix: report error if passed regexp script command includes flag

67f62a1

BlackHole1 requested changes Feb 1, 2023

View reviewed changes

refactor: update text

d9bd169

BlackHole1 requested changes Feb 1, 2023

View reviewed changes

Shinyaigeek added 2 commits February 2, 2023 00:13

fixup! fixup! fixup! fixup! fix: use regexp selector instaed of origi…

46522b3

…nal syntax

fixup! refactor: update text

1485f79

Shinyaigeek requested a review from BlackHole1 February 1, 2023 16:29

BlackHole1 approved these changes Feb 2, 2023

View reviewed changes

zkochan approved these changes Feb 2, 2023

View reviewed changes

zkochan merged commit 9ac6940 into main Feb 2, 2023

zkochan deleted the feature/task-runner branch February 2, 2023 01:27

jcayzac mentioned this pull request Dec 11, 2023

[deno task] suport filters/patterns/wildcards denoland/deno#21530

Open

		@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
		---
		"@pnpm/plugin-commands-script-runners": minor

	description: 'Run specified scripts one after one.',
	description: 'Run specified scripts one by one',

		function getSpecifiedScripts (scripts: PackageScripts, scriptName: string) {
		const specifiedSelector = getSpecifiedScripts(scripts, scriptName)

feat: support to run multi script commands specified with regex selector #5871

feat: support to run multi script commands specified with regex selector #5871

Conversation

Shinyaigeek commented Jan 2, 2023 • edited

Ticket

Details

Tests

My worries points

Shinyaigeek commented Jan 2, 2023 • edited

zkochan commented Jan 3, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Shinyaigeek Jan 3, 2023 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Shinyaigeek Jan 3, 2023 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Shinyaigeek Jan 3, 2023 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Shinyaigeek commented Jan 3, 2023

Shinyaigeek commented Jan 3, 2023

zkochan commented Jan 5, 2023

Shinyaigeek commented Jan 7, 2023

zkochan 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

Shinyaigeek commented Jan 9, 2023

zkochan commented Jan 11, 2023

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

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

BlackHole1 Jan 30, 2023 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

zkochan Jan 30, 2023 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

BlackHole1 Jan 30, 2023 • edited

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

Shinyaigeek Jan 31, 2023 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

zkochan commented Jan 29, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

BlackHole1 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

BlackHole1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Shinyaigeek commented Jan 2, 2023 •

edited

Shinyaigeek commented Jan 2, 2023 •

edited

Shinyaigeek Jan 3, 2023 •

edited

Shinyaigeek Jan 3, 2023 •

edited

Shinyaigeek Jan 3, 2023 •

edited

BlackHole1 Jan 30, 2023 •

edited

zkochan Jan 30, 2023 •

edited

BlackHole1 Jan 30, 2023 •

edited

Shinyaigeek Jan 31, 2023 •

edited