event driven - Page 92 - Developer IT

How to build a web site which gives a sub-domain dynamically to every registered user?

- by coderex

Suppose i have a site and i wish to give a sub-domain for each registered users. like my site http://site.com/ and the test-user is a user registered on my site and site want to make sub-domain for that user. Like http://test-user.site.com Like http://test-user1.site.com for test-user1. Hop you understood the requirement. How can i create a sub-domain using my sites back-end. or dynamically while register

Read the article

DDD and MVC: Difference between 'Model' and 'Entity'

- by Nathan Loding

I'm seriously confused about the concept of the 'Model' in MVC. Most frameworks that exist today put the Model between the Controller and the database, and the Model almost acts like a database abstraction layer. The concept of 'Fat Model Skinny Controller' is lost as the Controller starts doing more and more logic. In DDD, there is also the concept of a Domain Entity, which has a unique identity to it. As I understand it, a user is a good example of an Entity (unique userid, for instance). The Entity has a life-cycle -- it's values can change throughout the course of the action -- and then it's saved or discarded. The Entity I describe above is what I thought Model was supposed to be in MVC? How off-base am I? To clutter things more, you throw in other patterns, such as the Repository pattern (maybe putting a Service in there). It's pretty clear how the Repository would interact with an Entity -- how does it with a Model? Controllers can have multiple Models, which makes it seem like a Model is less a "database table" than it is a unique Entity. So, in very rough terms, which is better? No "Model" really ... class MyController { public function index() { $repo = new PostRepository(); $posts = $repo->findAllByDateRange('within 30 days'); foreach($posts as $post) { echo $post->Author; } } } Or this, which has a Model as the DAO? class MyController { public function index() { $model = new PostModel(); // maybe this returns a PostRepository? $posts = $model->findAllByDateRange('within 30 days'); while($posts->getNext()) { echo $posts->Post->Author; } } } Both those examples didn't even do what I was describing above. I'm clearly lost. Any input?

Read the article

How To Implement The Query Side Of CQS in DDD?

- by Laz

I have implemented the command side of DDD using the domain model and repositories, but how do I implement the query side? Do I create an entirely new domain model for the UI, and where is this kept in the project structure...in the domain layer, the UI layer, etc? Also, what do I use as my querying mechanism, do I create new repositories specifically for the UI domain objects, something other than repositories, or something else?

Read the article

How do I call exec in psake to an executable with a variable path?

- by Josh Kodroff

I can't seem to call this executable correctly in my psake deploy script. If I do this: exec { "$ArchiverOutputDir\NServiceBus.Host.exe /install" } It simply outputs this (and is clearly not calling the executable - just outputting the value of that expression): c:\ReloDotNet2_ServiceEndpoints\Archiver\NServiceBus.Host.exe /install But if I do this: exec { c:\ReloDotNet2_ServiceEndpoints\Archiver\NServiceBus.Host.exe /install } I get the expected output from the executable. How do I correctly call an executable with a variable in the path to the executable in psake? If this is actually a PowerShell issue, please feel free to correct the question to reflect that insight. I

Read the article

In a DDD approach, is this example modelled correctly?

- by Tag

Just created an acc on SO to ask this :) Assuming this simplified example: building a web application to manage projects... The application has the following requirements/rules. 1) Users should be able to create projects inserting the project name. 2) Project names cannot be empty. 3) Two projects can't have the same name. I'm using a 4-layered architecture (User Interface, Application, Domain, Infrastructure). On my Application Layer i have the following ProjectService.cs class: public class ProjectService { private IProjectRepository ProjectRepo { get; set; } public ProjectService(IProjectRepository projectRepo) { ProjectRepo = projectRepo; } public void CreateNewProject(string name) { IList<Project> projects = ProjectRepo.GetProjectsByName(name); if (projects.Count > 0) throw new Exception("Project name already exists."); Project project = new Project(name); ProjectRepo.InsertProject(project); } } On my Domain Layer, i have the Project.cs class and the IProjectRepository.cs interface: public class Project { public int ProjectID { get; private set; } public string Name { get; private set; } public Project(string name) { ValidateName(name); Name = name; } private void ValidateName(string name) { if (name == null || name.Equals(string.Empty)) { throw new Exception("Project name cannot be empty or null."); } } } public interface IProjectRepository { void InsertProject(Project project); IList<Project> GetProjectsByName(string projectName); } On my Infrastructure layer, i have the implementation of IProjectRepository which does the actual querying (the code is irrelevant). I don't like two things about this design: 1) I've read that the repository interfaces should be a part of the domain but the implementations should not. That makes no sense to me since i think the domain shouldn't call the repository methods (persistence ignorance), that should be a responsability of the services in the application layer. (Something tells me i'm terribly wrong.) 2) The process of creating a new project involves two validations (not null and not duplicate). In my design above, those two validations are scattered in two different places making it harder (imho) to see whats going on. So, my question is, from a DDD perspective, is this modelled correctly or would you do it in a different way?

Read the article

Getting started with nbehave

- by dotnetdev

Hi, I am looking at using BDD, however, when evaluating the stories/conditions I write (using nBehave), how do I check if the story passes? Do I write another library with test methods? For example, if I want to test a site for having a link called "About", do I write a method which can check this and then another method in another class library which can call the method to check the link via lambda syntax and add the relevant test and bdd attributes? Thanks

Read the article

If you are forced to use an Anemic domain model, where do you put your business logic and calculated

- by Jess

Our current O/RM tool does not really allow for rich domain models, so we are forced to utilize anemic (DTO) entities everywhere. This has worked fine, but I continue to struggle with where to put basic object-based business logic and calculated fields. Current layers: Presentation Service Repository Data/Entity Our repository layer has most of the basic fetch/validate/save logic, although the service layer does a lot of the more complex validation & saving (since save operations also do logging, checking of permissions, etc). The problem is where to put code like this: Decimal CalculateTotal(LineItemEntity li) { return li.Quantity * li.Price; } or Decimal CalculateOrderTotal(OrderEntity order) { Decimal orderTotal = 0; foreach (LineItemEntity li in order.LineItems) { orderTotal += CalculateTotal(li); } return orderTotal; } Any thoughts?

Read the article

Creating Domain Model

- by Zai

Hi, I have created a use case of a small application and now I have to create a Domain Model of that use cases of the application and which functions will be implemented in this application. I have no previous experience in Domain Modeling and UML, please suggest me steps to create the domain model or any suggestions, Do I have to have a very solid understanding of Object oriented concepts for creating domain model? The application is simple and creates online poll/voting system and have functions like Register Account, Confirmation Email of account, Membership, Create Poll, Send Poll etc

Read the article

Is It Incorrect to Make Domain Objects Aware of The Data Access Layer?

- by Noah Goodrich

I am currently working on rewriting an application to use Data Mappers that completely abstract the database from the Domain layer. However, I am now wondering which is the better approach to handling relationships between Domain objects: Call the necessary find() method from the related data mapper directly within the domain object Write the relationship logic into the native data mapper (which is what the examples tend to do in PoEAA) and then call the native data mapper function within the domain object. Either it seems to me that in order to preserve the 'Fat Model, Skinny Controller' mantra, the domain objects have to be aware of the data mappers (whether it be their own or that they have access to the other mappers in the system). Additionally it seems that Option 2 unnecessarily complicates the data access layer as it creates table access logic across multiple data mappers instead of confining it to a single data mapper. So, is it incorrect to make the domain objects aware of the related data mappers and to call data mapper functions directly from the domain objects? Update: These are the only two solutions that I can envision to handle the issue of relations between domain objects. Any example showing a better method would be welcome.

Read the article

Value objects in DDD - Why immutable?

- by Hobbes

I don't get why value objects in DDD should be immutable, nor do I see how this is easily done. (I'm focusing on C# and Entity Framework, if that matters.) For example, let's consider the classic Address value object. If you needed to change "123 Main St" to "123 Main Street", why should I need to construct a whole new object instead of saying myCustomer.Address.AddressLine1 = "123 Main Street"? (Even if Entity Framework supported structs, this would still be a problem, wouldn't it?) I understand (I think) the idea that value objects don't have an identity and are part of a domain object, but can someone explain why immutability is a Good Thing? EDIT: My final question here really should be "Can someone explain why immutability is a Good Thing as applied to Value Objects?" Sorry for the confusion! EDIT: To clairfy, I am not asking about CLR value types (vs reference types). I'm asking about the higher level DDD concept of Value Objects. For example, here is a hack-ish way to implement immutable value types for Entity Framework: http://rogeralsing.com/2009/05/21/entity-framework-4-immutable-value-objects. Basically, he just makes all setters private. Why go through the trouble of doing this?

Read the article

Deleting a resource in a Cucumber (Capybara) step doesn't work

- by Josiah Kiehl

Read the article

Is Form validation and Business validation too much?

- by Robert Cabri

I've got this question about form validation and business validation. I see a lot of frameworks that use some sort of form validation library. You submit some values and the library validates the values from the form. If not ok it will show some errors on you screen. If all goes to plan the values will be set into domain objects. Here the values will be or, better said, should validated (again). Most likely the same validation in the validation library. I know 2 PHP frameworks having this kind of construction Zend/Kohana. When I look at programming and some principles like Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) and single responsibility principle (SRP) this isn't a good way. As you can see it validates twice. Why not create domain objects that do the actual validation. Example: Form with username and email form is submitted. Values of the username field and the email field will be populated in 2 different Domain objects: Username and Email class Username {} class Email {} These objects validate their data and if not valid throw an exception. Do you agree? What do you think about this aproach? Is there a better way to implement validations? I'm confused about a lot of frameworks/developers handling this stuff. Are they all wrong or am I missing a point? Edit: I know there should also be client side kind of validation. This is a different ballgame in my Opinion. If You have some comments on this and a way to deal with this kind of stuff, please provide.

Read the article

Truly declarative language?

- by gjvdkamp

Hi all, Does anyone know of a truly declarative language? The behaviour I'm looking for is kind of what Excel does, where I can define variables and formulas, and have the formula's result change when the input changes (without having set the answer again myself) The behaviour I'm looking for is best shown with this pseudo code: X = 10 // define and assign two variables Y = 20; Z = X + Y // declare a formula that uses these two variables X = 50 // change one of the input variables ?Z // asking for Z should now give 70 (50 + 20) I've tried this in a lot of languages like F#, python, matlab etc, but every time i try this they come up with 30 instead of 70. Wich is correct from an imperative point of view, but i'm looking for a more declerative behaviour if you know what i mean. And this is just a very simple calculation. When things get more difficult it should handle stuff like recursion and memoization automagically. The code below would obviously work in C# but it's just so much code for the job, i'm looking for something a bit more to the point without all that 'technical noise' class BlaBla{ public int X {get;set;} // this used to be even worse before 3.0 public int Y {get;set;} public int Z {get{return X + Y;}} } static void main(){ BlaBla bla = new BlaBla(); bla.X = 10; bla.Y = 20; // can't define anything here bla.X = 50; // bit pointless here but I'll do it anyway. Console.Writeline(bla.Z);// 70, hurray! } This just seems like so much code, curly braces and semicolons that add nothing. Is there a language/ application (apart from Exel) that does this? Maybe I'm no doing it right in the mentioned langauges, or I've completely missed an app that does just this. I prototyped a language/ application that does this (along with some other stuff) and am thinking of productizing it. I just can't believe it's not there yet. Don't want to waste my time. Thanks in advance, Gert-Jan

Read the article

General ORM design question

- by Calvin

Suppose you have 2 classes, Person and Rabbit. A person can do a number of things to a rabbit, s/he can either feed it, buy it and become its owner, or give it away. A rabbit can have none or at most 1 owner at a time. And if it is not fed for a while, it may die. Class Person { Void Feed(Rabbit r); Void Buy(Rabbit r); Void Giveaway(Person p, Rabbit r); Rabbit[] rabbits; } Class Rabbit { Bool IsAlive(); Person pwner; } There are a couple of observations from the domain model: Person and Rabbit can have references to each other Any actions on 1 object can also change the state of the other object Even if no explicit actions are invoked, there can still be a change of state in the objects (e.g. Rabbit can be starved to death, and that causes it to be removed from the Person.rabbits array) As DDD is concerned, I think the correct approach is to synchronize all calls that may change the states in the domain model. For instance, if a Person buys a Rabbit, s/he would need to acquire a lock in Person to make a change to the rabbits array AND also another lock in Rabbit to change its owner before releasing the first one. This would prevent a race condition where 2 Persons claim to be the owner of the little Rabbit. The other approach is to let the database to handle all these synchronizations. Who makes the first call wins, but then the DB needs to have some kind of business logics to figure out if it is a valid transaction (e.g. if a Rabbit already has an owner, it cannot change its owner unless the Person gives it away). There are both pros/cons in either approach, and I’d expect the “best” solution would be somewhere in-between. How would you do it in real life? What’s your take and experience? Also, is it a valid concern that there can be another race condition the domain model has committed its change but before it is fully committed in the database? And for the 3rd observation (i.e. state change due to time factor). How will you do it?

Read the article

Sorting out POCO, Repository Pattern, Unit of Work, and ORM

- by CoffeeAddict

I'm reading a crapload on all these subjects: POCO Repository Pattern Unit of work Using an ORM mapper ok I see the basic definitions of each in books, etc. but I can't visualize this all together. Meaning an example structure (DL, BL, PL). So what, you have your DL objects that contain your CRUD methods, then your BL objects which are "mapped" using an ORM back to your DL objects? What about DTOs...they're your DL objects right? I'm confused. Can anyone really explain all this together or send me example code? I'm just trying to put this together. I am determining whether to go LINQ to SQL or EF 4 (not sure about NHibrernate yet). Just not getting the concepts as in physical layers and code layers here and what each type of object contains (just properties for DTOs, and CRUDs for your core DL classes that match the table fields???). I just need some guidance here. I'm reading Fowler's books and starting to read Evans but just not all there yet.

Read the article

Where should configuration be placed?

- by James P.

I have an application structured as follows: dao domain main services utils I've made a class that reads the application configuration from an XML file. The question is where should it be placed? In the utilities package?

Read the article

What is the best practice in regards to building composite dtos off of an aggregate root with domain

- by Chance

I'm trying to figure out the best approach/practice for assembling a composite data transfer object off of an aggregate root and would love to hear people's thoughts on this. For example, lets say I have a root that has a few domain objects as children. I want to assemble a specific view dto, based on some business logic, that either has attributes or full dto's of it's objects. What I'm struggling with is trying to figure out where that assembly should happen. I can see it going on the domain object of the aggregate root as there is some business logic associated with it. The benefits of this approach from what I've deduced thus far is that it should reduce the inevitable business logic from bleeding outisde of the domain object. It also allows for private methods that take care of tasks that could become more complex from an external builder. The downsides being that the domain object becomes much more entrenched in the application's workflow and represents much more than just the domain object. It also could become very large in the scenario where you need multiple composite Dtos. Alternatively, I could also see it belonging to some form of transfer object assembler where there is a builder for each domain object. The domain objects would still be responsible for GetDto() and UpdateFromDto(dto). Outside of that, the builder would handle the construction and deconstruction of composite dtos. The downside is kind of mentioned above, where I fear this will easily lead to developers unfamiliar with DDD bleeding a ton of business logic into the assembler which is what I want to desperately avoid. Any thoughts would be greatly apperciated.

Read the article

ASP.Net 4.0 Database Created Pages

- by Tyler

I want to create asp.net 4.0 dynamic pages loaded from my MS SQL server. Basically, its a list of locations with informations. For example: Location1 would have the page www.site.com/location/location1.aspx Location44 would have the page www.site.com/location/location44.aspx I dont even know where to start with this, url writting maybe?

Read the article

How should rules for Aggregate Roots be enforced?

- by MylesRip

While searching the web, I came across a list of rules from Eric Evans' book that should be enforced for aggregates: The root Entity has global identity and is ultimately responsible for checking invariants Root Entities have global identity. Entities inside the boundary have local identity, unique only within the Aggregate. Nothing outside the Aggregate boundary can hold a reference to anything inside, except to the root Entity. The root Entity can hand references to the internal Entities to other objects, but they can only use them transiently (within a single method or block). Only Aggregate Roots can be obtained directly with database queries. Everything else must be done through traversal. Objects within the Aggregate can hold references to other Aggregate roots. A delete operation must remove everything within the Aggregate boundary all at once When a change to any object within the Aggregate boundary is committed, all invariants of the whole Aggregate must be satisfied. This all seems fine in theory, but I don't see how these rules would be enforced in the real world. Take rule 3 for example. Once the root entity has given an exteral object a reference to an internal entity, what's to keep that external object from holding on to the reference beyond the single method or block? (If the enforcement of this is platform-specific, I would be interested in knowing how this would be enforced within a C#/.NET/NHibernate environment.)

Read the article

DDD: Enum like entities

- by Chris

Hi all, I have the following DB model: **Person table** ID | Name | StateId ------------------------------ 1 Joe 1 2 Peter 1 3 John 2 **State table** ID | Desc ------------------------------ 1 Working 2 Vacation and domain model would be (simplified): public class Person { public int Id { get; } public string Name { get; set; } public State State { get; set; } } public class State { private int id; public string Name { get; set; } } The state might be used in the domain logic e.g.: if(person.State == State.Working) // some logic So from my understanding, the State acts like a value object which is used for domain logic checks. But it also needs to be present in the DB model to represent a clean ERM. So state might be extended to: public class State { private int id; public string Name { get; set; } public static State New {get {return new State([hardCodedIdHere?], [hardCodeNameHere?]);}} } But using this approach the name of the state would be hardcoded into the domain. Do you know what I mean? Is there a standard approach for such a thing? From my point of view what I am trying to do is using an object (which is persisted from the ERM design perspective) as a sort of value object within my domain. What do you think? Question update: Probably my question wasn't clear enough. What I need to know is, how I would use an entity (like the State example) that is stored in a database within my domain logic. To avoid things like: if(person.State.Id == State.Working.Id) // some logic or if(person.State.Id == WORKING_ID) // some logic

Read the article

Pagination in a Rich Domain Model

- by user246790

I use rich domain model in my app. The basic ideas were taken there. For example I have User and Comment entities. They are defined as following: <?php class Model_User extends Model_Abstract { public function getComments() { /** * @var Model_Mapper_Db_Comment */ $mapper = $this->getMapper(); $commentsBlob = $mapper->getUserComments($this->getId()); return new Model_Collection_Comments($commentsBlob); } } class Model_Mapper_Db_Comment extends Model_Mapper_Db_Abstract { const TABLE_NAME = 'comments'; protected $_mapperTableName = self::TABLE_NAME; public function getUserComments($user_id) { $commentsBlob = $this->_getTable()->fetchAllByUserId((int)$user_id); return $commentsBlob->toArray(); } } class Model_Comment extends Model_Abstract { } ?> Mapper's getUserComments function simply returns something like: return $this->getTable->fetchAllByUserId($user_id) which is array. fetchAllByUserId accepts $count and $offset params, but I don't know to pass them from my Controller to this function through model without rewriting all the model code. So the question is how can I organize pagination through model data (getComments). Is there a "beatiful" method to get comments from 5 to 10, not all, as getComments returns by default.

Read the article

Good design of mapping Java Domain objects to Tables (using Hibernate)

- by M. McKenzie

Hey guys, I have a question that is more in the realm of design, than implementation. I'm also happy for anyone to point out resources for the answer and I'll gladly, research for myself. Highly simplified Java and SQL: Say I have a business domain POJO called 'Picture' with three attributes. class Picture int idPicture String fileName long size Say I have another business domain POJO called "Item" with 3 attributes Class Item int idItem String itemName ArrayList itemPictures These would be a normal simple relationship. You could say that 'Picture' object, will never exist outside an 'Item' object. Assume a picture belongs only to a specific item, but that an item can have multiple pictures Now - using good database design (3rd Normal Form), we know that we should put items and pictures in their own tables. Here is what I assume would be correct. table Item int idItem (primary key) String itemName table Picture int idPicture (primary key) varchar(45) fileName long size int idItem (foreign key) Here is my question: If you are making Hibernate mapping files for these objects. In the data design, your Picture table needs a column to refer to the Item, so that a foreign key relation can be maintained. However,in your business domain objects - your Picture does not hold a reference/attribute to the idItem - and does not need to know it. A java Picture instance is always instantiated inside an Item instance. If you want to know the Item that the Picture belongs to you are already in the correct scope. Call myItem.getIdItem() and myItem.getItemPictures(),and you have the two pieces of information you need. I know that Hibernate tools have a generator that can auto make your POJO's from looking at your database. My problem stems from the fact that I planned out the data design for this experiment/project first. Then when I went to make the domain java objects, I realized that good design dictated that the objects hold other objects in a nested way. This is obviously different from the way that a database schema is - where all objects(tables) are flat and hold no other complex types within them. What is a good way to reconcile this? Would you: (A) Make the hibernate mapping files so that Picture.hbm.xml has a mapping to the POJO parent's idItem Field (if it's even possible) (B) Add an int attribute in the Picture class to refer to the idItem and set it at instantiation, thus simplifying the hbm.xml mapping file by having all table fields as local attributes in the class (C) Fix the database design because it is wrong, dork. I'd truly appreciate any feedback

Read the article

Social Media Java Design Problem

- by jboyd

I need to put something together quickly that will take blog posts and place them on social media sites, the requirements are as follows: Blog Entries are independent records that already exist, they have a published date and a modified date, the blog entry application cannot be changed, at least not substantially A new blog entry, or update needs to be sent to social media sites I currently do not need to update or delete social media communications if the blog entry is edited, or deleted, though I may need to later My design problems here are as follows: how do I know the status of each update how can I figure out what blog entry updates and postings have already been sent out? how can I quickly poll the blog entry table for postings that haven't yet been sent out? Avoiding looking at each Entry record from the DB as an object and asking if it's been sent already. That would be too slow. I cannot hook into any Blog Entry update code, my only option would be to create a trigger that an update queues something to be processed I'm looking for general guiding principles here, the biggest problem I'm having is coming up with any reasonable way to figure out if a blog entry should be sent to our social media sites in the first place

Read the article

Protecting sensitive entity data

- by Andreas

Hi, I'm looking for some advice on architecture for a client/server solution with some peculiarities. The client is a fairly thick one, leaving the server mostly to peristence, concurrency and infrastructure concerns. The server contains a number of entities which contain both sensitive and public information. Think for example that the entities are persons, assume that social security number and name are sensitive and age is publicly viewable. When starting the client, the user is presented with a number of entities, not disclosing any sensitive information. At any time the user can choose to log in and authenticate against the server, given the authentication is successful the user is granted access to the sensitive information. The client is hosting a domain model and I was thinking of implementing this as some kind of "lazy loading", making the first request instantiating the entities and later refreshing them with sensitive data. The entity getters would throw exceptions on sensitive information when they've not been disclosed, f.e.: class PersonImpl : PersonEntity { private bool undisclosed; public override string SocialSecurityNumber { get { if (undisclosed) throw new UndisclosedDataException(); return base.SocialSecurityNumber; } } } Another more friendly approach could be to have a value object indicating that the value is undisclosed. get { if (undisclosed) return undisclosedValue; return base.SocialSecurityNumber; } Some concerns: What if the user logs in and then out, the sensitive data has been loaded but must be disclosed once again. One could argue that this type of functionality belongs within the domain and not some infrastructural implementation(i.e. repository implementations). As always when dealing with a larger number of properties there's a risk that this type of functionality clutters the code Any insights or discussion is appreciated!

Read the article

How would you organize this in asp.net mvc?

- by chobo

I have an asp.net mvc 2.0 application that contains Areas/Modules like calendar, admin, etc... There may be cases where more than one area needs to access the same Repo, so I am not sure where to put the Data Access Layers and Repositories. First Option: Should I create Data Access Layer files (Linq to SQL in my case) with their accompanying Repositories for each area, so each area only contains the Tables, and Repositories needed by those areas. The benefit is that everything needed to run that module is one place, so it is more encapsulated (in my mind anyway). The downside is that I may have duplicate queries, because other modules may use the same query. Second Option Or, would it be better to place the DAL and Repositories outside the Area's and treat them as Global? The advantage is I won't have any duplicate queries, but I may be loading a lot of unnecessary queries and DAL tables up for certain modules. It is also more work to reuse or modify these modules for future projects (though the chance of reusing them is slim to none :)) Which option makes more sense? If someone has a better way I'd love to hear it. Thanks!

Search Results

Search found 17151 results on 687 pages for 'event driven'.

Page 92/687 | < Previous Page | 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 | Next Page >

- by coderex

- by Nathan Loding

- by Laz

- by Josh Kodroff

- by Tag

- by dotnetdev

- by Jess

- by Zai

- by Noah Goodrich

- by Hobbes

- by Josiah Kiehl

- by Robert Cabri

- by gjvdkamp

- by Calvin

- by CoffeeAddict

- by James P.

- by Chance

- by Tyler

- by MylesRip

- by Chris

- by user246790

- by M. McKenzie

- by jboyd

- by Andreas

- by chobo

< Previous Page | 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 | Next Page >