#467 New logo request for libseccomp
Closed: Fixed 4 years ago Opened 5 years ago by pcmoore.

  • Deadline

None, I will be grateful for any help you can provide and I'm happy to work with whatever schedule is convenient :)

  • Size requirements in pixels if applicable

No hard requirements, but it would be nice if the logo scaled from a small size (e.g. GitHub project pages) to something larger for use in presentations.

  • If this is a logo or icon for an application

This is a logo. The project, libseccomp, is a system library without any user visible interface.

  • What application is this for?

The libseccomp project: https://github.com/seccomp/libseccomp

  • Brief description of what the application does

The libseccomp project's goal is to provide an easy to use, platform agnostic interface to the Linux Kernel's syscall filtering interface. While the project has only been active for a few years, it is being used by projects such as systemd, Docker, WebKit, QEMU, numerous application sandboxes, and well as several others.

I'm happy to explain this further to anyone who wants to work on the logo.

  • Packager or developer contact information (IRC nick + email + wiki profile page link)

Paul Moore
paul@paul-moore.com
pmoore@redhat.com
https://github.com/pcmoore
http://www.paul-moore.com

  • If this is for an icon, please indicate if you need desktop icons or web application icons.

Logo only please.


@pcmoore I'm just letting you know that I haven't forgotten about your request for a logo for libseccomp. I'll get it done after I finish a handful of other, more time-sensitive design requests. Thanks for your patience. -Palmer

Metadata Update from @duffy:
- Assignee reset
- Issue close_status updated to: None

5 years ago

Should I read anything into the metadata update, or is this simply part of the process in migrating away from fedorahosted.org?

pcmoore: I would love to draft some ideas for this. further explanation would be helpful. My non-technical understanding from far too little reading is that the project enables faster, easier, clearer access to the kernel for application developers. Is the primary benefit speed (faster development)? Is there a presentation or video showing development before libseccomp and after to view for better understanding?

Lightening question round (these are silly but helpful):
1. Three verbs to describe libseccomp:
2. Two adjectives to describe libseccomp:
3. Name one color:
4. Up, Down, or sideways?
5. Solid, malleable, or liquid?
6. Round, Rectangle, or sharp?

Looking forward to it!

Hi Kyle,

Thanks for offering to help, it's greatly appreciated!

As far as background is concerned, I'm not sure of your technical background, but I did give an introductory presentation on libseccomp a few years ago; sadly, no video is available but the slides can be found here:

... ignore the old links at the end, everything is on GitHub now (links in the original request/ticket above). But basically the main goal behind libseccomp is to make good syscall filtering more accessible to application developers. The "good" aspect meaning less architecture dependence and better/more-optimized code than an average application developer would likely write. Does that help any?

As for the lightening round, let me see ...

1. Three verbs to describe libseccomp:
filter, harden, simplify

2. Two adjectives to describe libseccomp:
safe, easy

3. Name one color:
blue ?

4. Up, Down, or sideways?
down ?

5. Solid, malleable, or liquid?
solid ?

6. Round, Rectangle, or sharp?
round ? rectangle? [side note: I think a round logo would be a better fit given the current trends, but when I think of libseccomp I think square comes to mind first if that helps]

So, did I get the answers right? ;)

Perfectly right indeed! I'll try to have some concept versions up sometime this weekend and we can move forward from there. Thank you for your work!

pcmoore (and all),

Here are my starting contenders: https://little.kylerconway.com/uptime/libseccomp/libseccomp-draft.png

The top intends to hit "simplify, easy, solid"
The middle is an even simpler version of the above (perhaps too much so)
The bottom shoots for filtration.

In general, I kept coming back to squares in a grid and disorganized elements falling down and becoming organized, arranged, and simplified.

Open to all feedback (including "this is way off the mark").

;)

Hi Kyle! Thank you for taking this ticket! I think simple is good - much better than complex, especially in a logo. Ideally there should be 1 interesting point in a logo, something to catch the eye. So out of these three, the bottom one has most potential, in my opinion.

Hi All,

Thanks for putting these together Kyle, I really appreciate the time and effort put into these! I'm always impressed when people can take a very abstract (and non-visual) concept like libseccomp and create a visual representation that makes sense. Here are some quick thoughts on the three designs:

Top

My least favorite of the three. I agree with mleonova's comment that simple is good (a bit more about that at the end) and to me this is too complex, especially with the connectivity between the blue squares and the "secconf" lettering on the right (BTW: it's libseccoMP, not libseccoNF; although that's a great name if we ever have a dedicated conference <g>).

Middle

I like this twist on the top logo. Also, your comment about squares in a grig got me thinking about the idea of using this symbol as a way of representing syscall filtering ... what if we used the grid but grayed out some of the individual boxes while leaving others full-color? The idea being that some of those boxes (syscalls) were filtered out (gray) while others were allowed to execute (colored)?

Bottom

I like how the "libseccomp" name was contiguous (more on the text below), and I think your "falling element" idea is a good and obvious connection to libseccomp, although I think a bit more order might be nice (disorder and security generally don't go hand-in-hand <g>). What if we used the falling element concept, with fixed-width vertical elements of varying height that all touched a horizontal line that spanned the logo; all of the vertical elements would extend above the horizontal line but only some of the vertical lines would extend below the horizontal line? The idea being that the horizontal line was the kernel boundary, the vertical elements the syscalls, and those vertical elements that terminated on the horizontal line represent the filtered syscalls and those that continued below the line represent the syscalls that succeeded. Does that make sense?

One last quick comment on the simple and text comments I made above. Originally I was thinking of a simple logo that looks nice on a GitHub project page (or similar), and as a result I was thinking the logo would need to be just a graphic, no text. I would still like something I could use in that context, but your initial contenders all included text and you got me thinking that having a logo with text would also be nice for presentations and similar things. Do you think it would be possible to arrive at a concept that would work well both in a small avatar-esque role as well as a larger logo, complete with "libseccomp" text?

Thanks again for all your help, you've given me a couple nice visual ideas (yes!) and I'm excited to see what the next revision may bring!

mleonova: agreed. I figured I'd start with the simplest ones I'd generated―there were much busier ones if you can believe it! Appreciate the feedback!

pcmoore: thanks for your kind words. I hope that my typo can become the unofficial source of future libsecCONFs in the future!

Thanks for the feedback on no. 2 -- I worry it's too simple but I was hoping you'd see something in it that might communicate something about the project. The greyed out squares sounds like a good idea. I suspect we need to stick with just 16 squares max, but I'll show my work anyway and you can see both versions.

libseccomp-2-ii.png

I think we can have something that can work both small and large. I'll defer a bit to mleonova on that. The grid is an easy standalone without text (and the whole of LIBSECCOMP can fit nicely beneath as below).

libseccomp-2ii-dn.png

For version #3 I really like your thought about vertical lines being filtered by the horizontal line (some of my earliest drawings had this concept, but I had trouble not having it conflict with the readability of the text). I still have that concern, unfortunately, but I believe this is progress. I matched the line width to the L & I in the font (though the "M" has a different width). This allowed interplay between the descending and filtered elements and the text, but I'm worried it obscures more than highlights the text below. (Also, I sort of feel like the part of the text that should be highlighted is the "LIB" portion.

Also -- I'm a bit worried that it's not disorganized enough up top with the even-width lines. I'll keep playing around there.

At any rate―more food for thought below. Thanks for the feedback. Looking forward to more.

libseccomp-3-ii.png

Hi Kyle! I see great potential here! What do you say to simplifying even more? For example if we take just the shapes of a square and a drop, and unite them together in 1 icon? I think you could get some very interesting shapes. I would not recommend using color right away - it can be very distracting in early stages of logo design. Try using just shades of black (gray)?

libseccomp.png

One more idea to try would be to look at a more typographic logo, using maybe some letters from their name: L S C or something ;)
Great progress!

Very interesting shapes, @kylerconway ! Here I would like the ticket creator @pcmoore to come in again and comment on which direction he wants you to go - we have a good number of variants here!

Hi Kyle,

My apologies for the delay in responding, I've been a bit busy on other projects but I see you've put that time to good use; I'm really liking how these designs are progressing! Some quick thoughts in no particular priority or order:

  • Looking at the blue/gray grid square, I agree that 16 mini-squares is the way to go. I also agree that it would probably work well with, and without, the "libseccomp" text.

  • I think I've decided that in versions where the "libseccomp" text is included, I prefer the logos that keep the text contiguous and with the same font size/emphasis.

  • The vertical line idea turned out pretty well, I like the middle choice the best (undisturbed, monochromatic font), although I'm now wondering if this is too complex of an idea to scale down to a small round/square avatar style image.

  • I don't think I care for mixing raindrops and mini-squares in the larger squares, but the circle and mini-square combination does look pretty nice.

  • Thinking about it more, I think I understand what you were saying about the raindrops and hardening/clarifying, but the analogy just doesn't seem "right" to me for some reason.

  • I'm not a fan of that shade of brown used in some of those mini-squares. Another color please? Maybe another shade of blue? Actually, that might be interesting ... the blue circles on one side of the dark grey mini-squares and a slightly different shade of blue mini-squares (maybe circles?) on the other?

  • I like the monochromatic nature of some of the most recent images, but they either suffered from the split text problem (see above), had some confusing imagery (the symbolism of that image in the middle two is lost on me), or had too much negative space (if I'm using that term correctly).

Looking back at the images a second time, and considering my comments above, I think my favorite is probably the 16-square image, and it's variants as discussed. Any interest in going one more round playing with the circles/squares idea?

Once again, I really appreciate the time and effort you've put into this so far. My artistic skills are "limited" to put it nicely so having help like this is a very happy thing.

pcmoore & mleonova,

Sorry for the delays. I believe I've understood your feedback and wanted to update with some modifications based on my understanding. Specifically:

  1. I've added a darker blue color
  2. I've removed the yellow
  3. I've focused on the 16 square layout (mleonova: your feedback helpful here for common use-cases).
  4. Provided an alternative layout with circles.
  5. Provided possible monochromatic versions of the 16 square layout.
  6. Provided non-text versions of these draft logos.

I don't know that I'm sold on these as the final iteration yet, but I very much like the monochromatic versions of these layouts. I also prefer them with text.

Feedback very much appreciated. Apologies for the delay!

g4586.png

Hi @kylerconway ! One thing I want to ask from you right now is to clearly separate the variants and number them 1, 2, 3, so the discussion could move forward more easily ;)

Updated with logo candidate numbers

Hi Kyle,

Thanks for swapping out the yellow color; the different shade of blue might not be the best design choice, but I like it much better than the yellow :)

Looking at the first row, I think I like the mix of squares and circles more than just the 16 squares design. Further, I think I like the diagonal square/circle version (first row, third column from the left, #3) more than just the top row of circles (first row, right most column, #4).

Looking at the second row, I think my comments above still apply to the monochrome variants. Personally, I think I like the more colorful variants, but I understand how less colors could be good in some situations. Would it be possible to do something in greyscale and not purely monochromatic?

Once again, similar comments apply to the graphics only variants in the third row. I'm not completely sold on the border for those in the third row; I like the idea of the border, but something about the hard corners of the small squares contrasting with the soft, rounded corners of the border seems "off". Would the logo look silly if the small squares had softer corners?

I'm very happy with how these are turning out! I agree with Kyle that I tend to like the versions with the text more than those without, but I think ultimately I'm still going to need a text-free variant for things like the GitHub organization avatar where it gets shrunk down to a small circular window.

Hi @kylerconway ! One thing I want to ask from you right now is to clearly separate the variants and number them 1, 2, 3, so the discussion could move forward more easily ;)

Updated. Thanks!

Hi Paul @pcmoore , whichever version you agree upon, I think it's a good idea to have the logo in a couple different variants: color, black and white, with or without text, so you could use them according to your needs. Then I'd also recommend having 1 really small png if you ever need it for a favicon - so try shrinking one of those to 16x16 and see how it looks.

Kyle @kylerconway , great work! I think 3, 7, 11 is just one logo, am I correct? I like it most, too. I'd love to see it separate from all the others, so one could pay closer attention to detail. Thank you :)

@kylerconway I added the logo numbers to my last comment; I'm hopeful that I was clear enough, but the numbers should remove any doubt.

@mleonova Yes, I think having the different variants of the same logo would be a good idea; the same goes for the 16x16 suggestion - thanks.

You two are the design/graphics experts here so I'll defer to you, especially you Kyle since you've been doing the work, but I'm quite happy with the logos as they stand.

@mleonova is there anything else you might suggest?

@kylerconway is there anything else you wanted to try or explore?

@pcmoore great! My only question would be - where are you planning to use the logo? We might want to put it into context as a mockup before finalizing the design. Thanks ;)

@pcmoore great! My only question would be - where are you planning to use the logo? We might want to put it into context as a mockup before finalizing the design. Thanks ;)

Agreed. I'd like to see it in context but I'm happy you're happy. The very tiny version (16x16) is nearly illegible, but there's not much to be done there when there are 16 squares in 16x16. I made a modification (below) which I don't prefer, but perhaps thickening the stroke lines at smaller scales makes sense (mleonova?).

lsc-color.png lsm-bw.png

lsm-sm-bw.png lsc-sm.png

Toward that end―of further simplifying―I offer the below (sort of like the slight tilt and abacus feel).

lib-1-color.png lib-tilt-color.png

lib-1-bw.png lib-tilt-bw.png

Metadata Update from @mleonova:
- Issue assigned to kylerconway

5 years ago

With respect to context and mockups, my initial motivation for the logo request was to have a better logo than the default random GitHub project/organization logo. I've replaced the GitHub default with a boring an uninspiring "S" because the default was bothering me, but you can see the existing GitHub project page here: https://github.com/seccomp. Please don't read anything into the "S" logo, it was a both a quick fix and the limit of my graphical design abilities ;)

Once we have a logo I expect to also use it in the project's README file (via Markdown, visible on https://github.com/seccomp/libseccomp) and in future presentations. I could hack up a modified README with the logo if that would help?

As far as the recent iterations go, I agree that I don't like the hollow circles as much as the solid circles. However, the tiny versions due look a bit better ... I think ... I keep jumping between the two versions and the differences are definitely very subtle.

I'm sorry to say that I'm also not a fan of the shish kabob logos either. I look at the square logos and I can see both the filter effects over multiple syscall rules represented in the horizontal and vertical elements; I think we lose this with the kabob design.

Oh, those do look nice, thank you @kylerconway! Do you or @mleonova have any further thoughts, comments?

I'm really happy with how this turned out, great work @kylerconway ! My only suggestion - I would try seeing how it would look with the grid scaled down relative to the logotype just to tip the balance a little more evenly towards the project name, just to see how it looks?

Regarding the top logo (text below the graphic): I think it is more readable, although it does lose out on the nice alignment of the left/right boundaries across the text and graphic. Probably not a big deal since I think the only time something like that might matter is in a avatar, or similar, and I'm not sure I would use the graphic+text logo there.

Regarding the bottom logo (text beside the graphic): I like this. This may be my favorite graphic+text logo yet! Although, what would it look like if the text were the same height as the graphic? Would the text overpower the graphic?

Hi @kylerconway ! I think the latest version looks great, amazing work! I think you can go ahead and create other versions of it: black and white, white on black, one without text, favicon, maybe come up with a useful color palette (optional).
It might look something like https://mashaleonova.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/taskotron_logo1.png

Hi @kylerconway, thanks for humoring me on the graphic+text logo with the larger text, although now that I see it I'm not sure which one I prefer. Do you or @mleonova have a preference from a design point of view?

Hi @kylerconway ! I am a little bit concerned about the outlined logo lines - they seem very thin and almost disappearing into the background. The distance between them is hardly noticeable, too. Would you consider making them thicker? It's ok if they overlap.

@pcmoore I think I prefer the first version, with the logo slightly bigger.

Thanks for the logo collage @kylerconway , that helps put everything together.

Looking at it again today, I think I agree with @mleonova that the first version (with the logo larger than the text) looks a bit better. I apologize for the extra work.

I also agree that the monochromatic logos look a bit "thin". I'm guessing this is due to the fact that we're seeing these against a dark background for the first time because they looked reasonable the first time (on a white background).

Lastly, a quick question on the color pallet: I understand the leftmost four colors as they are used in the logo, but what is the value in the rightmost four colors? Are they simply complementary?

Thanks @mleonova and @pcmoore! I've thickened the lines on the version with a larger logo next to text. Per the discussion, I've also added a version where the circles are not outlines, but filled in. That helps visually I think, but against the white background looks a little off (blue circles turning grey). It's possible that's my hangup though, so they're presented below.

As for the colors, I actually thought they might be useful for a documentation context (e.g. RED: warning). They're not necessarily useful in the context of the github page or other ways we've discussed using on this thread, but might be in other contexts. I actually went to your github page, pulled up the readme, and modified the CSS to test headers and hyperlinks and tags with these colors to test for myself a bit for that context. Then I realized that I'm not certain you can―or would want to!―do that on github. But other areas might find use.

As this is my first logo contribution via pagure and fedora I'll rely on @duffy and @mleonova to ensure I get all the files they're expecting in a logo set to you once we think we've got it right!

Thanks to all for your help and patience!

libseccomp-db-thick.png

Thanks @mleonova and @pcmoore! I've thickened the lines on the version with a larger logo next to text. Per the discussion, I've also added a version where the circles are not outlines, but filled in. That helps visually I think, but against the white background looks a little off (blue circles turning grey). It's possible that's my hangup though, so they're presented below.

Thanks @kylerconway, I think the thicker lines definitely helps. As far as my personal preference, I think the hollow circles look best (I agree with your logic regarding the color transition).

As for the colors, I actually thought they might be useful for a documentation context (e.g. RED: warning). They're not necessarily useful in the context of the github page or other ways we've discussed using on this thread, but might be in other contexts. I actually went to your github page, pulled up the readme, and modified the CSS to test headers and hyperlinks and tags with these colors to test for myself a bit for that context. Then I realized that I'm not certain you can―or would want to!―do that on github. But other areas might find use.

Okay, that makes sense. I don't think I'll be messing with the GitHub CSS anytime soon, but they could be useful in presentations, docs, etc. Would it be possible to group the colors into logo and non-logo? I'm rather simple minded when it comes to these things and the more foolproof the better ;)

As this is my first logo contribution via pagure and fedora I'll rely on @duffy and @mleonova to ensure I get all the files they're expecting in a logo set to you once we think we've got it right!

I can work with whatever you, @mleonova, and @duffy decide, but for me a perfect solution would be each logo in an individual file (PNG is great, bonus points for something like SVG that scales if needed) and a collage (with the colors) like you've been doing recently.

I'd also like one of the "tiny" favicon logos you put together (above); I don't have an immediate need for that, but I may in the future, and I know it wasn't a simple scale-down.

Thanks to all for your help and patience!

Your welcome, although from my perspective you're the one who deserves the thanks. You've helped me resolve an issue way outside my abilities and I greatly appreciate your time and effort.

@pcmoore -- I've uploaded and attached a zipped folder that contains:

  1. A color, black and white, and inverted version of the logo with text (PNG).
  2. A color, black and white, and inverted version of the logo without text (PNG).
  3. A color, black and white, and inverted version of an alternative orientation of the logo with text. (this last per @duffy) (PNG)
  4. The inkscape file with all of the assets in SVG (with additional colors and more).

Do let me know if there's anything else I can help with. Thank you for your work on libseccomp!

libseccomp-logos.tar.xz

HI @kylerconway, thanks for putting together the tarball with everything, but the link above doesn't seem to be working?

UPDATE: It appears that none of the attached files/images are working at the moment, I suspect Pagure is having problems at the moment, I'll try again tomorrow.

@pcmoore Thanks for the update! I uploaded to my site as well in case you want to take a look before Pagure gets back up: http://kylerconway.com/fedora-design/libseccomp-logos.tar.xz

@pcmoore -- were you able to get the files? Looks like pagure is still down.

I'm sorry @kylerconway, things got a little busy for me heading into a holiday weekend, but I just pulled down the tarball and it looks great - thank you very much!

When I add these files upstream I'd like to give you credit. I see your website (http://kylerconway.com), is there some other handle/address you would want associated with you (e.g. twitter, email, etc.)?

Also, another bit of administrative housekeeping, what license are you using for the logo @kylerconway?

For reference the main libseccomp library is released under the LGPL v2.1 and the golang bindings are released under the BSD two clause license. For a variety of reasons I think I'm going to put the artwork in a separate repository so please don't feel the need to adopt either one of those licenses for this work, I only mention them as a FYI. If needed, I expect @mleonova and @duffy could provide some guidance on how artwork is typically licensed in the Open Source world.

Glad you got it! Feel free to direct them to the website mentioned to find me. As for licenses, I'll defer to @mleonova and @duffy. In the past I've used Creative Commons CC-BY or CC-BY-SA for this type of work, but I'll defer to them for best license for your use case.

@kylerconway I think either CC-BY or CC-BY-SA should be fine, do you have a preference? It's your artwork, you get to pick the license ;)

@pcmoore -- @duffy indicated that you'll want the logo to not be released under a permissive license. It sounds like the logo is © me, an my signing of a Fedora Contributor Agreement gives you full rights to use the logo. @duffy can perhaps clarify further. Hope this makes sense though!

Okay, how about we just stick with the existing libseccomp LGPL-2.1 license; any objections @kylerconway and/or @duffy ?

@pcmoore no issue on my end. I've reached out to @duffy to see if she has any.

@kylerconway thanks, let me know what you hear back.

Hi @pcmoore - so you probably don't want to license the logo under an open source license like LGPL etc since it's a trademark. Typically when we do open source project logos they are not openly licensed because of how US trademark law works. It's sort of a sticky thing, take a look at the licensing of the fedora-logos package to see how we typically handle this situation in packaging - the license statement we provide for that is at /usr/share/doc/fedora-logos/COPYING and you may want to adopt something like that.

Unfortunately I don't know so much about the legal intracacies here, but you can contact legal@fedoraproject.org for some more / better info.

I hope this helps?

Thanks for the input @duffy, you make a good point about the logo and trademarks. I'll have to read through the fedora-logos text and talk with the lawyers to see what my options are for libseccomp.

I'll update back when I have more information.

@pcmoore -- sounds good. Do let us know.

@kylerconway I am in Red Hat Legal and am helping @pcmoore with a related matter and he pointed me to this issue. I wanted to note that I do not think the Fedora Project Contributor Agreement applies to any work done by the Fedora Design Team for projects that are not specifically Fedora projects.

(Even if the FPCA did apply, it wouldn't give @pcmoore full rights to use the logo. By default, non-software content subject to the FPCA is licensed [essentially] under CC BY-SA 3.0.)

Sorry for the delay @kylerconway, but I wanted to make sure we had everything sorted out on the legal front, thanks to @ref for helping out.

Since the trademark worries that Fedora faces aren't really a concern for a little project like libseccomp, we can be more flexible when it comes to licensing. As we talked about previously, ultimately it is your choice on how you license your work and after talking with @ref it seems like your original suggestion of CC BY-SA 4.0 is a pretty good choice.

I've gone ahead and setup a repository on GitHub for the libseccomp artwork:

... other than a README and LICENSE (CC BY-SA 4.0), it's currently empty. I feel bad asking you to jump through yet another hoop, but would you mind submitting your work as a pull request to the libseccomp-artwork repo or sending an email to the mailing list (libseccomp@googlegroups.com) with the signed-off patch? This gives us a nice public record of everything attached to the repo.

NOTE: please pay special attention to the certificate of origin and sign-off information in the repo's README file

@pcmoore

Thanks for the fun! (Seriously!) I think I've done this (git is not an expertise of mine). Please do let me know if I've done things correctly! Thanks so much again! Great to work with you!

Thanks for the pull request @kylerconway! There are a few minor things that need to be changed in the PR, but let's follow up with that over on GitHub.

Thanks again everyone for all your help - I really appreciate it!

Metadata Update from @pcmoore:
- Issue close_status updated to: Fixed
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

4 years ago

@pcmoore -- Sounds good. Do let me know what's left to do. I'm less familiar with git, but will do my best.

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata
Attachments 28
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 5 years ago View Comment
Attached 4 years ago View Comment