Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Programming applications for making music on Linux.

Moderators: MattKingUSA, khz

j_e_f_f_g
Established Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:48 pm
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by j_e_f_f_g »

Heikki Ketoharju wrote:haven't heard of any dead links that have suddenly resurrected.
More than that, I've never met anyone who ever wanted to view a web page with, for example, 32 dead links.

But you and I are thinking too logically and pragmatically. Let's suspend that for a moment...
why we should list dead links on the site. What purpose?
Let's say you're going to "redesign" the wiki, so you're reading up on the tags feature. As you do, you start thinking Wow, this is COOL! I could do all sorts of complex stuff with this!". It doesn't matter if there's almost no chance that a 404 will suddenly resolve itself, or that no one wants to view a page with dead links. It doesn't even matter if the "cool stuff" you imagine doing results in having to maintain an extra copy of every page -- one full of dead links no one wants to view -- on a wiki that obviously hasn't had enough maintenance on its already existing pages. You just want to do something cool with those tags.

Getting it now?
don't want Linuxaudio wiki as an archive for old stuff. There is a great need for simple place containing understandable and easy-to-follow documentation, listnings of actual, working software and guides for beginners and intermediate users.
Wow, you're pragmatic. (And I agree 100%.) That's no fun. You could take a page already cluttered with content, and rather than delete useless stuff, instead add more stuff like a blinking object to click on reading "show me links that lead to nowhere/nothing", and a search button that wades through and shows you that stuff.
Thing with the tagging system is different if it eases out maintenance work of the wiki.
No! We need to double the workload! 2 copies of every page! This lets us have fun with tags.
For me it's hard to believe that we have a broad need to put one link into several lists.
Too pragmatic. If you had your way, the wiki would contain only useful stuff, be reduced in size and maintenance work, and if the rate/efficiency at which you simplified the intro page is any indication, it would probably be done by week's end.

Let's instead spend a lot of time playing with tags and databases, and if like so many other over-reaching volunteer projects, it never gets done, then at least we'll have fun. Ok?
about link rot when planning to move big chunks of information from one place to another?
You're putting the cart before the horse. The existing stuff has been festering in its current state for a long time, and undoubtably will continue as so unless someone pragmatic comes up with a simpler, efficient update. Meanwhile, the database isn't even done.

Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.

j_e_f_f_g
Established Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:48 pm
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by j_e_f_f_g »

(dead links) can immediately and effortlessly be removed from displaying unless the user chooses to display them (a regular page should exclude them
And yet, on the date/time of this post, there are 32 dead links always shown on http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categor ... i_software . (Actually worse, since each link takes you to an intermediate page that simply contains the dead link). And as I noted, there are numerous other improvements that could be made.

Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.

j_e_f_f_g
Established Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:48 pm
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by j_e_f_f_g »

Going over the page at http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categories/alsa_seq and there's more dead links. In addition to some of the same dead links as on the other page, there are the following, additional 404's:

FreeBoB
LiveMix
tapeutape
Tranches

The page at http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categor ... _resources is mostly the same dead links as on the first page.

On http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categories/players :

AlsaPlayer
Ambisonics Player
Flare
FMOD - refers to Win/MAC/iOS software, not Linux
IBXM
kmid -- renamed to Drumstick. How many previous names did this thing have?? Is its dev schizophrenic?
KModBox
midiplay/midirec
modplugplay
mp3blaster -- new link http://mp3blaster.sourceforge.net and new name (thankfully not Drumstick)
MpegTVPlayer -- For Windows Phone, not linux
MPlayer
MPST Digital Jukebox -- links to a personal blog, not software
MP/NMP
Musica
MusicMatch Jukebox
newplayer 1.1
playmidi -- new link http://sourceforge.net/projects/playmidi
pmidi
Quark
S3MOD
Sidplay2 -- nonfunctioning page
srgplay
TinySID -- new link http://www.rsinsch.de
Tk3Play
tplay
WHAMp
Xgmod
xmms2
zgsmplay
zsid

Another 28 dead links.
Last edited by j_e_f_f_g on Sun Feb 23, 2014 8:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.

TheSafePlaces
Established Member
Posts: 200
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:50 am

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by TheSafePlaces »

Oh, I see this has taken a turn for subtly uncivilized.

Granted, deprecated and broken link pages being marked so instead of being deleted, and hidden from the average user's view by using the {{topic>}} properly, are just me being sentimental. Never mind that this was already how it was done by previous maintainers, that doing this keeps us from doing a lot of unnecessary work and lets us focus on more productive improvements to the wiki.

Granted, that moving pages will break any bookmarks other people had kept.

Tell me then...it should be perfectly practical and pragmatic to keep references to DOCUMENTATION and stuff to be READ in wiki.linuxaudio.org/APPS/ , right?

/apps/, which, incidentally, also happens to house an old software index kind of thing - already in okay shape, just waiting to be maintained and updated a bit. http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/list/onepage

If you are so concerned about not breaking links, have fun making redirect links for everything in /apps/, yourself, manually. :|

(Or...just put up a note helping users out in case they have a dead bookmark? Practical and pragmatic - surely not?)
j_e_f_f_g wrote:
(dead links) can immediately and effortlessly be removed from displaying unless the user chooses to display them (a regular page should exclude them
And yet, on the date/time of this post, there are 32 dead links always shown on http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categor ... i_software . (Actually worse, since each link takes you to an intermediate page that simply contains the dead link). And as I noted, there are numerous other improvements that could be made.
Have a look at the page again - http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categor ... i_software
I added TWO WORDS to the source and the existing unmaintained/dead link entries are hidden. Two minutes, and we have a page showing dead links and unmaintained projects, in addition to the main page. Seriously? Tags are so bad, aren't they?

Heikki Ketoharju - Since you yourself say, nothing belongs to just one category. Therefore, it makes no sense to group things like that. A link/software can belong to more than one category, which by itself not only aids reorganization and maintenance, it can also make a far better UX if we have something in PHP to generate pages dynamically.
Looking for the ideal distro. NixOS?
Newbie composer, somewhat-experienced classical guitarist.
Largely known as HisaoNakai/contrapunctus on IRC and other places.
TheSafePlaces
Established Member
Posts: 200
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:50 am

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by TheSafePlaces »

We're also forgetting something - removing dead documentation/reading links is still acceptable for debate, albeit a silly debate IMHO because nothing really should be deleted, not on what is a reference + archive. But removing software entries? Major...big...NO. This is the libre software world. Projects can be, and do, get resurrected. New developers might want to look through old projects they could resurrect or fork (...as they're all too often advised.). Considering deleting application entries is outright ridiculous.

About breaking links due to moving - the Linux Audio wiki was not so long ago merged with the old LinuxMusicians wiki. (Good move? Yes. Broke links? Yes. But I digress.) I really, REALLY doubt too many people made bookmarks to inner pages of the wiki. And the re-organization (moving) will only make things easier to find again.

PS - I think tagging posts with dead_link/unmaintained instead of deleting them also helps with this endeavor of preserving links, doesn't it?
Looking for the ideal distro. NixOS?
Newbie composer, somewhat-experienced classical guitarist.
Largely known as HisaoNakai/contrapunctus on IRC and other places.
User avatar
Heikki Ketoharju
Established Member
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:24 am

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by Heikki Ketoharju »

TheSafePlaces wrote:We're also forgetting something - removing dead documentation/reading links is still acceptable for debate, albeit a silly debate IMHO because nothing really should be deleted, not on what is a reference + archive. But removing software entries? Major...big...NO. This is the libre software world. Projects can be, and do, get resurrected. New developers might want to look through old projects they could resurrect or fork (...as they're all too often advised.). Considering deleting application entries is outright ridiculous.
I agree with you about the software entries. We just have to make sure that unmaintained entries are clearly marked as unmaintained (I.E. tagging would implement a special template to the entry). Sometimes It's also good to know that "that useful program I used few years ago" has gone unmaintained, and that there is nowadays different way of achieving things. That kind of information could also be added to the deprecated application entries.

I'm still not sure about those documentation links. User has to do two clicks: first, click entry in the listning, then, after landing to the page that just contains the link, she has to click again. Can we eliminate the need for two clicks? If we can, and if we can also hide deprecated from any search functions (like I asked on my previous post), I don't see any big trouble using this tagging system for documentation/links also.
TheSafePlaces wrote: About breaking links due to moving - the Linux Audio wiki was not so long ago merged with the old LinuxMusicians wiki. (Good move? Yes. Broke links? Yes. But I digress.) I really, REALLY doubt too many people made bookmarks to inner pages of the wiki. And the re-organization (moving) will only make things easier to find again.

PS - I think tagging posts with dead_link/unmaintained instead of deleting them also helps with this endeavor of preserving links, doesn't it?
Yes, I really support re-organizing. This wiki really needs it. But still in my opinion we should think about link rot also. Redirects are good idea, and I'm willing to help with that. Maybe you know better than me, which entries should be moved and redirected? Tell that to me, and I will help you with the migration process.
Remember that link rot isn't just a question about bookmarks, but also about other pages linking to our wiki, old IRC/forum discussions with links, and who knows what. So that's why we should think about link rot and try to avoid breaking any links.

One final thing:

I ask you all to discuss politely. I don't want to fight with anybody. I just want to know how this wiki is maintained and what I could/should do to make things better. We have cleared many things in this discussion (In my opinion at least) and I believe after week or two we will have stronger and better maintenance team and a roadmap to the future of the wiki. After that I hope we will also get support from users and other members of Linux audio community, who will see that wiki has got significantly better.
User avatar
raboof
Established Member
Posts: 1855
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 11:58 am
Location: Deventer, NL
Has thanked: 50 times
Been thanked: 74 times
Contact:

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by raboof »

j_e_f_f_g wrote:Wow, you're pragmatic. (And I agree 100%.) That's no fun. You could take a page already cluttered with content, and rather than delete useless stuff, instead add more stuff like a blinking object to click on reading "show me links that lead to nowhere/nothing", and a search button that wades through and shows you that stuff.
Thing with the tagging system is different if it eases out maintenance work of the wiki.
No! We need to double the workload! 2 copies of every page! This lets us have fun with tags.
Jeff, I know it's probably hyperbole and not meant in an ill way, but please adjust your tone. If you disagree with a proposed approach, just calmly explain that you disagree and why. Mocking the people who are volunteering to make our community better is not acceptable.
j_e_f_f_g
Established Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:48 pm
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by j_e_f_f_g »

TheSafePlaces wrote:this was already how it was done by previous maintainers
Which explains why I found 32 dead links yesterday, and over another 30 today (see my above post), and could likely find another 30 tomorrow. People have been "having fun" playing around with tags and other esoteric software features instead of doing boring drudgery like actually checking for dead links, and ensuring those aren't presented to readers. I found nearly 70 dead links in 2 days, and i didn't use a single tag to do it. Obviously those links were valid when originally entered. But for example, a number of them link to Geocities -- a host that disappeared over 5 years ago -- which means readers have been presented with those 404s for over 1,825 days now.

Look I understand that drudgery is no fun, and people do want to enjoy themselves, especially when not being paid to do something. But at some point (like 1,825 days) of a problem not being fixed, you have to say "What we've been doing isn't, and after all this time likely never will, fix the problem". It's time to stop keeping dead links marked with tags in a restricted access database. Reformat the app listings in an open, easily edited format so someone willing to do that drudgery, like Heikki, can clean up this mess of 404s. He'll probably get it done in record time too.
I still see a whole bunch of dead links, for example http://www.geocities.com/kellinwood/raw ... index.html which has been displayed for over 1,825 days now.
removing software entries? NO. Projects can get resurrected.
I'm actually a Linux MIDI dev, and I want to resurrect RawMIDI2SMF. The current Yahoo CEO can't get me the sources, but fortunately the dead link is still being shown on the wiki. Do me a huge favor; type in a couple words and fetch me the sources? Thanks much.

But seriously, if someone somehow manages to resurrect the project, he'll add a new entry in the open listing, with the new project name (Drumstick) and new working link. He won't have to bother some sysadmin to delete the older entry in a restricted database (which apparently won't get done anyway).

You could even have a page where readers list dead projects, and offer sources for, projects they want resurrected. But don't make it a restricted database. And don't mix that stuff with the live projects with working links, even if you can do it with a restricted tagged database, because that will become a unmanaged mess for 1,285 days as history has shown.

Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.

User avatar
Heikki Ketoharju
Established Member
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:24 am

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by Heikki Ketoharju »

j_e_f_f_g wrote:
TheSafePlaces wrote:this was already how it was done by previous maintainers
dgery is no fun, and people do want to enjoy themselves, especially when not being paid to do something. But at some point (like 1,825 days) of a problem not being fixed, you have to say "What we've been doing isn't, and after all this time likely never will, fix the problem". It's time to stop keeping dead links marked with tags in a restricted access database. Reformat the app listings in an open, easily edited format so someone willing to do that drudgery, like Heikki, can clean up this mess of 404s. He'll probably get it done in record time too.
Maybe I have to be more clear. I think current application database structure works well with tags. Only way how it could be make better would be to write a simple guide how tags are used.

I just cleaned DAW page. Marked dead links and some unmaintained projects:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categor ... ng_systems

In addition I adjusted few other listings so that they no longer show entries marked with dead_link of unmaintained tag.


I still appeal to you, j_e_f_f_g: Please don't insult anybody. I just want to maintain Linuxaudio wiki and make it better. In order to make it better, we need clear and calm discussion, not insults to each others. This is voluntary work, and therefore good spirit in our community is very important. TheSafePlaces has done a lot of work with this wiki and he/she really has right to tell his/her own viewpoint to things. He/she has been longer on this project and that's why I'm eager to listen him/her.
TheSafePlaces
Established Member
Posts: 200
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:50 am

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by TheSafePlaces »

Heikki Ketoharju -
Marking entries prominently - Sounds good. We can use the existing <note> command to put up deprecated notices, that's manual but doable. A cool thing would be a note being added automatically when an entry is tagged unmaintained/dead_link - needs someone with some experience with DokuWiki plugins/someone with time to learn about them, though; that in itself probably needs some knowledge of PHP or whatever the plugins use.

User having to click twice - Well-spotted, but I'm afraid you're only half right :) There is an external link sign, which lets them get to the link in one click (it's located to the right). It's a bit obtuse, admittedly. Again, someone who could modify the plugins could change that and make it more noticeable, although it's not something users can't understand after hanging around the wiki a few times.

Moving resource links from /apps/ to /wiki/links/ - If everyone agrees that redirects wont really be necessary, we can go ahead and ask AutoStatic to move pages. If setting up redirects is seen as necessary and we all agree to it, we can split the work and start doing it. Either's fine by me.

Saw the 'Multitrack...' page, nice, yay! :D Hopefully some day we will have a dynamic system, letting the user hit a toggle button - "Show/Hide unmaintained" - or something, to have them shown/hidden.

j_e_f_f_g -
I'm simply asking you to add tags to pages which are unmaintained or have dead links, instead of removing them. Checking for dead links is something that has to be done manually no matter what we go with, and I really appreciate you doing that - just mark them, don't remove them :\ Just because the older method was not being used often enough and/or properly does not mean it is without merit :| I'm only asking you to keep to the unwritten 'editing policy'.

Believe it or not, I have given this a major amount of thought on IRC days before I was aware of this thread - the choice was to move all old link-pages to a 'static' system (i.e. just add links normally, instead of making a page for them and tagging it), or move all new links to the link-page system. I think the link-page + tags system offers more maintainability...and easier maintenance results in a better wiki, I think you'll agree. It's not a toy, it's a very useful tool.

re:'restricted access database' - I'm not aware of editing on the wiki being restricted, and I certainly didn't have anything to do with that. If you have some permission-issues editing, then something is screwy and we need to speak to AutoStatic/rgareus/someone else who has root.

And what's so hard about the tag system? Sure, adding a page for a resource is slightly more effort than just adding the link directly - but one can and should be using the source of other pages as a base in the first place. The syntax is quite self-evident. The payoff - lets maintainers filter things effortlessly, and support for dynamic pages in the future, which'll give the same capability to users (I think it's already a major asset, and as the wiki grows, it'll only prove even more useful, for user and maintainer alike).
j_e_f_f_g wrote: But seriously, if someone somehow manages to resurrect the project, he'll add a new entry in the open listing, with the new project name (Drumstick) and new working link. He won't have to bother some sysadmin to delete the older entry in a restricted database (which apparently won't get done anyway).
I'm afraid I don't understand this at all. What is this 'open listing'? Why would the sysadmin delete the older entry when they could simply update it?
Looking for the ideal distro. NixOS?
Newbie composer, somewhat-experienced classical guitarist.
Largely known as HisaoNakai/contrapunctus on IRC and other places.
j_e_f_f_g
Established Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:48 pm
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by j_e_f_f_g »

Did tons of work on http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categor ... i_software

Besides hiding all broken links, I also updated all desc. There are 4 Linux MIDI APIs; OSS, ALSA Raw Midi, ALSA Sequencer, and JackMidi. Which api a program uses makes a difference what MIDI hardware, and other MIDI apps, a program works with. For example, of the 10 MIDI interfaces in my studio, only 1 works with ALSA Seq (and therefore JackMidi). All of them work with RawMidi. (Folks, if you write a MIDI App, you must support ALSA RawMidi to work with all Linux-supporrted MIDI hardware. It's easy. See http://home.roadrunner.com/~jgglatt/tec ... idplay.htm and http://home.roadrunner.com/~jgglatt/tech/arawmidrec.htm). As another example, an ALSA seq app can be made to work with a JackMidi app using a2jmidi. A musician may want to know if a specific app supports that. (BTW, should provide "oss" and "rawmidi" tags. I made sure alsa_seq and jack_midi are used where applicable).

So I've been noting which API(s) each app uses, which usually means analyzing the sources of each project. Dozens of projects. Most done. But lots of current MIDI software ain't even listed (or tagged) and needs to be added.

Also, musicians like to know if an app has a GUI. I note a non-GUI app as "command-line". For a GUI app, I identify its toolkit (QT, GTK, FLTK) or environment (CSound, Java) so a musician can match an app to his system.

Removed author's names from desc, and put them in the proper place. desc should describe the software, not people.

Also wrote more detailed, informative descs. Uptodate too. Some apps have morphed into something different than the orig desc.

Removed "new" tag from lots of software that's old. Given this scenario, the "new" and "newsworthy" tags shouldn't even exist.

Oh, and I did http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categor ... e_software too.

Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.

TheSafePlaces
Established Member
Posts: 200
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:50 am

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by TheSafePlaces »

Nice, j_e_f_f_g ! @_@

Say, I want to add HarryHaaren's developer-concerned writings to the developer's section (which is woefully underpopulated).
His old blog has some posts, and there's also the OpenAV Productions developer section.
Should we add individual posts or list the blog itself?
Linking to blog posts helps people get to the information faster...listing the whole blog itself saves us trouble.

Should I move wiki/tutorials to wiki/user_resources? The latter is presented as 'external user resources index'...

Lastly, raboof, Heikki Ketoharju - as you folks intend to make the wiki cover both 'beginner documentation' and 'advanced user documentation' - how do you plan to separate them? (assuming you do) We already have a fair amount of restructuring to do (namely moving non-software-index-entry pages from /apps/all/ to /wiki/links), so if any other restructuring is required we should try to do it at the earliest.
Looking for the ideal distro. NixOS?
Newbie composer, somewhat-experienced classical guitarist.
Largely known as HisaoNakai/contrapunctus on IRC and other places.
daeavelwyn
Established Member
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 6:08 am

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by daeavelwyn »

Hi here,

Ok, so, it seems i've done stuff in the wrong order, but i hope you won't blame me for :-D.
So i'm working on a french translation of kxstudio manual and i've already created those pages :

http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/wiki/kxstudio_manual_fr
and
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/wiki/cadence_introduction_fr

if i'm wrong about this, please explain me how i could create french entries in the wiki :-)

regards
j_e_f_f_g
Established Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:48 pm
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by j_e_f_f_g »

Going through the entire list of apps, and tagging every dead link I find. So far I've done only the A's. But lots of 404's already. (I did manage to resolve a few 404s).

I'm checking only the links for software apps, drivers, and programming frameworks. I'm not checking any of the links to online articles/tutorials/how-to's, music by musicians, and other non-apps.

Along the way, I'm...

1) Updating links that redirect to new pages.
2) Removing the "new" tag from old software. Something new 5 years ago ain't new now.
3) Adding screenshots.
4) Where an app does audio/MIDI playback/recording, I note which APIs it uses (if I can deduce from the author's page. I ain't gonna download/analyze the source of every app listed).
5) Noting whether its UI is command-line, or which GUI toolkit it uses (if I can deduce from the author's page).
6) Moving author's name out of the desc, and putting it under author.
7) Making more detailed, informative, uptodate descs. I laughed at 1 app which said "uses the latest linux audio system/technology". It uses OSS and its GUI is Motif.
8 ) Checking tags. For example, found some midi apps not marked "midi_software" like... um... QTractor. Yes, honest.

In other words, I'm doing way too much work.

P.S. GMaq will be happy to know I marked AVLinux as "unmaintained" because there isn't a 64-bit version. Pbbbbbbt.

P.P.S. Was going to mark Carla as MIDI software, but it doesn't even recognize 9 of my 10 MIDI interfaces. And for the one it sees (that damn EMU 1616m), Carla gives an error msg. FalkTx. RawMidi API. Works with all 10 MIDI interfaces. Even the crappy EMU ALSA driver
Last edited by j_e_f_f_g on Tue Feb 25, 2014 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.

j_e_f_f_g
Established Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:48 pm
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Linuxaudio Wiki maintainers?

Post by j_e_f_f_g »

falkTX wrote:I use RtMidi.
What lang is Carla? (Don't say Python). If C/C++, i'll patch in RawMidi support for you. I need a LV2 host to test an LV2 plugin that uses the midi extension. Hopefully, you used a UI I know. (Don't say Qt. Say GTK).

Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.

Post Reply