Like all the other Mac-toting fashion hounds, I've been playing with Ruby on Rails of late. I have the good fortune of having a buddy who has a paying gig building a Rails site and he is kind enough to give me commit rights so I can use it in a meaningful way without giving up my day job as a J2EE guy, and without having to find an excuse to use it at work.
Without getting all hysterical about it, there are many things in Rails that should give pause to the J2EE crowd. When I switched from C++ to Java, the thing I liked most about coding in Java was the much improved signal-to-noise ratio compared with C++. I found I spent much less time thinking about computer stuff and much more time thinking about the problem at hand and the concepts of the problem space, largely ignoring the problems of the implementation space. This was partly the language, partly the libraries, and partly the community around Java at the time, but when you add it all up, the result was better software faster, which is really all I want.
Now, having used the classic J2EE stack for a while (Struts/Tiles/Hibernate, et al), and having watched J2EE vendors bloat their products to the point of collapse, using Rails has given me the same feeling. No struts-config.xml, no tiles-defs.xml, no *.hbm.xml files, and much less time thinking about the machine and its implementation layers. The signal-to-noise ratio is simply better than in the form of J2EE I've learned. Ruby/Rails also appear to have the libraries and the community to make the whole stack work. The whole setup feels more supple and malleable than Java, and, since that feeling was what attracted me to Java, that has to be a concern for those who think Java is some kind of universal maximum, rather than just a local one, as all technologies are.
There are some things in Rails about which I retain mixed feelings. ActiveRecord seems to me to be less of an O/R mapping layer, and more of an O/R unification layer. This caused me severe brain ache for a while, but I'm suspending disbelief for the moment. The unit testing model involves database access (and lots of it), which is a definition of unit testing I've always disliked strongly. The functional testing model (so far as I have looked) doesn't use a model based on parsing and filling out and submitting the HTML forms served by the running application. It appears to be more a controller-testing setup than what I would call a functional testing setup. But I'm only a newbie and might have missed some stuff.
Saturday, December 24, 2005
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
Brain Fade?
How can the most important application I have be so neglected by its creators? I've been waiting a year and a half for a new version of Personal Brain and this is what I get - half a dozen fixes to bugs I hadn't noticed and not a single new feature. One of the highlights is that they've updated their phone number because they moved offices! I don't know if this company is starved for resources, but if ever there was a company that deserves some, this is it. I hope I don't jinx them and they get snapped up by Microsoft and ruined, but this slow death is possibly worse!
Friday, October 28, 2005
Now we're cooking
I've only recently started using a laptop all day every day, so I thought it was time to put to use a trick shown to me by some buddies for making the all-day laptop experience a lot more ergonomic. So a quick trip to the homewares store for a cook book stand, and bingo! You've got the screen at eye level. Check out the picture for an idea of how it works. You need to invest in an external keyboard and mouse, of course, but it's the poor man's docking station. Start a fashion trend in your cube farm today!
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Flat Out in First
Imagine you're driving from one side of the city to the other with a friend and you're in a big hurry. You're running really late and you're desperate to get where you're going. To your amazement, your friend sets off down the road and puts the pedal to the metal in first gear. He's gripping the wheel, concentrating fiercely, the engine is screaming, and you're being overtaken by every car on the road, doing about 30kph.
You say to your friend, "Hey, don't you want to go into second gear?"
But your friend says, "Don't interrupt me, man, I'm going as fast as I can and I really need to concentrate here"
You try again. "But we'll get there faster if you change gears!"
But your friend says, "No we won't! I tried that before and putting in the clutch __definitely__ slows you down, silly! And the last thing I can do now is slow down when we're running so late!"
The problem with development teams is that you can't actually hear the engine screaming and see the car shaking and feel the lack of speed. But it seems to me a lot of development teams are flat out in first gear. Agile development has a lot of practices that are all about changing gears.
You say to your friend, "Hey, don't you want to go into second gear?"
But your friend says, "Don't interrupt me, man, I'm going as fast as I can and I really need to concentrate here"
You try again. "But we'll get there faster if you change gears!"
But your friend says, "No we won't! I tried that before and putting in the clutch __definitely__ slows you down, silly! And the last thing I can do now is slow down when we're running so late!"
The problem with development teams is that you can't actually hear the engine screaming and see the car shaking and feel the lack of speed. But it seems to me a lot of development teams are flat out in first gear. Agile development has a lot of practices that are all about changing gears.
Saturday, October 22, 2005
An Agile Requirements Parable
In my current role I'm trying to introduce agile development into a team of about 30 people. One of the challenges is the approach to requirements. The incumbent process is pretty standard waterfall with requirements documents that are both too big to read and too short to be used as the only input for development, as well as being written from an implementation perspective rather than a user perspective. As well as being written up front in their entirety before coding begins. So no news here.
But the biggest issue is (as usual) not a technical one but a human one, in this case the implicit belief that requirements can be 'captured' if you just think hard enough (and long enough) as opposed to the agile view that requirements need to be trawled for constantly, starting at a high level and increasing the resolution as implementation approaches, leaving the resolution lower for far-off things.
I unwittingly stumbled on a requirements parable the other day when, of all things, I attempted to buy a new pen. I succeeded in purchasing a pen, but I failed to get one that met all my requirements. I'm serious; I couldn't even buy a pen for myself that satisfied all my requirements. Read on if you are still on your chair.
So, why did I need this pen? I carry around a pocket notebook and a pen wherever I go, having learned from experience that freeing my brain from minutiae leaves it free to dream and create. I've tried other tools, PDA's, dictaphones, etc, but the good old pen and notebook just works. The definition of 'works' here is that the time and effort between being confronted with something that I need to remember but that I don't want to deal with emmediately must be minimised. I even have a kind of code for the notes I take to speed it up, and recently spent half an hour in a stationery shop buying just the right notebook (with high end features like one of those built in straps to mark your page). So I'm pretty serious about this pen. It has to be able to be connected to the notebook firmly so they can't be separated accidentally, and it has to have a broad enough point that my dim eyes can see what I've written.
So how did I go wrong? Well, the pen I've used for a long time started to become unreliable, so I had to replace it. It literally did not occur to me that the fact it was one of those ones that you press the top to extend the ballpoint was important. I was thinking maybe I'd try a felt tip pen rather than a ballpoint as the nibs come in wider formats. So I looked at the mountains of pens in the store and picked a broad-nib felt tip number with a clip that attached snugly to my notebook. So how long did it take to realise my error? The first thought I had that I wanted to write down, I pulled the unit out of my pocket, separated the pen and instinctively went to push the button to extend the ballpoint with one hand while flipping to the current page with the other. Only there was no button. There was a cap! That requires two hands (or one hand far more dextrous than mine) to pull off and put somewhere else, probably on the butt of the body of the pen. I was stupefied. I was now thinking about the damned pen and not the brilliant idea I'd just had.. If there is something you just want to stay out of your way, it's the thing between you and your great ideas.
So what's the moral of the story? I guess it's something like this: Assuming you are capable of defining requirements up front without exposing users to the solution is bogus. Even if the system is well established. Even if it's as simple as a pen. Even if you're so clever that you can read the customer's mind. :P
But the biggest issue is (as usual) not a technical one but a human one, in this case the implicit belief that requirements can be 'captured' if you just think hard enough (and long enough) as opposed to the agile view that requirements need to be trawled for constantly, starting at a high level and increasing the resolution as implementation approaches, leaving the resolution lower for far-off things.
I unwittingly stumbled on a requirements parable the other day when, of all things, I attempted to buy a new pen. I succeeded in purchasing a pen, but I failed to get one that met all my requirements. I'm serious; I couldn't even buy a pen for myself that satisfied all my requirements. Read on if you are still on your chair.
So, why did I need this pen? I carry around a pocket notebook and a pen wherever I go, having learned from experience that freeing my brain from minutiae leaves it free to dream and create. I've tried other tools, PDA's, dictaphones, etc, but the good old pen and notebook just works. The definition of 'works' here is that the time and effort between being confronted with something that I need to remember but that I don't want to deal with emmediately must be minimised. I even have a kind of code for the notes I take to speed it up, and recently spent half an hour in a stationery shop buying just the right notebook (with high end features like one of those built in straps to mark your page). So I'm pretty serious about this pen. It has to be able to be connected to the notebook firmly so they can't be separated accidentally, and it has to have a broad enough point that my dim eyes can see what I've written.
So how did I go wrong? Well, the pen I've used for a long time started to become unreliable, so I had to replace it. It literally did not occur to me that the fact it was one of those ones that you press the top to extend the ballpoint was important. I was thinking maybe I'd try a felt tip pen rather than a ballpoint as the nibs come in wider formats. So I looked at the mountains of pens in the store and picked a broad-nib felt tip number with a clip that attached snugly to my notebook. So how long did it take to realise my error? The first thought I had that I wanted to write down, I pulled the unit out of my pocket, separated the pen and instinctively went to push the button to extend the ballpoint with one hand while flipping to the current page with the other. Only there was no button. There was a cap! That requires two hands (or one hand far more dextrous than mine) to pull off and put somewhere else, probably on the butt of the body of the pen. I was stupefied. I was now thinking about the damned pen and not the brilliant idea I'd just had.. If there is something you just want to stay out of your way, it's the thing between you and your great ideas.
So what's the moral of the story? I guess it's something like this: Assuming you are capable of defining requirements up front without exposing users to the solution is bogus. Even if the system is well established. Even if it's as simple as a pen. Even if you're so clever that you can read the customer's mind. :P
Saturday, September 3, 2005
Back in the iLife
When I started my new job a few weeks ago, I had to wait a while before my new laptop arrived from Dell. So I turned up on the first day with my Powerbook and plugged in. I was very pleased to find that Apple Mail knows all about Exchange servers out of the box, so I was up and running with no problems and went on happily for a couple of weeks. When the Dell arrived, I spent a couple of days with both machines on the desk while getting it all set up. It was only after switching the Mac back to home use mode and starting to use the Dell for work that I was struck by an obvious solution to a problem I'd been facing for a long time. One of the reasons I switched jobs was in pursuit of a better work/life balance. To me this means drawing a sharper line between the two something I've struggled with in recent years. And here I was looking at the solution: use one computer for work and another for life. Sounds simple, but I missed it until now. So now the Dell stays off over the weekend (it stays on long enough to check the week's work in to CVS at home), and doesn't get looked at until Monday morning. The Mac, with photos, videos, electronic books, music software and fun geek stuff like Ruby and Objective C stays on all weekend and is nothing but fun. Nice.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
It's Mac time now...for my old man
It's been a while since I blogged at all, having been a little busy switching jobs, having recently also switched computers (to a Mac Powerbook) and having tried to switch programming languages (learning some Objective C, which is lots of fun). But I'm convinced enough by my Mac experience to have convinced my dear old dad to jump as well (to a Mac Mini) on the demise of his old PC. So does that make me an official cult member? I've also started thinking that one of those flat panel iMacs will look pretty good next to the espresso machine for my wife and daughters to use......:P
Tuesday, June 14, 2005
It (sort of) just works!
A lot of my geek buddies have been switching to the Mac over the last 18 months or so, and with the new FBT year rolling around, I thought I'd get a half-price PowerBook 15-inch with all the bells and whistles to join in the fun. For those of you not in Australia (shame on you), there is a tax law here that allows anyone to buy a laptop each year with pre-tax dollars. This is a great deal (since our top tax rate is almost 50 percent) and is very popular as you might imagine.
Anyway, I'm showing my age by saying it's 19 years since I last had a Mac, so I knew things would have changed quite a bit in the meantime. I've been reading 'Mac OS X The Missing Manual' while waiting for my machine to arrive so I already had some of the keyboard shortcuts down before I had the box open. Which brings me to the first of my observations about the oft-repeated cries of "It just works" by the MacCult members...don't get me wrong, this little baby is a beautiful thing, but in the interests of full disclosure, I thought I'd jot down my notes on the switching experience...
Getting the machine delivered was something Apple found quite challenging. I ordered the PowerBook, MS Office, iWork, .mac and Logic Express, and they got off to a bad start by shipping the software individually so that a couple of times when the courier's arrival at my house found nobody at home, they went away until we called them and could commit to waiting at home for a full day before they'd deliver. Not so bad for a single delivery, but when the order is part-shipped in four separate trips, this gets a bit old. Of course the software was no use without the machine, which didn't turn up at all. Problem was, the online order status page showed it as having been shipped many days ago. Several calls to the courier and Apple finally led to the discovery that the courier had returned it to Apple because the exterior box was slightly damaged in transit. Still no drama, except that Apple seemed to not have a process to keep it moving. I had to call them multiple times to get multiple people to find the box and ship it to me after testing that the machine was OK. Very annoying.
The machine arrived last Friday and with sweaty palms I fired it up. The warm, welcoming and soothing setup process came to a shuddering halt at the wireless network setup screen. No matter what I did, I could not get it to connect to my network. Now I know my 128-bit WEP key off by heart, so this should not be hard. Eventually I gave up in disgust and told it I didn't have a network at all. When I got into the OS proper, I found I had extra options, including to change its default WEP key size of 40 bits to the 128 I needed. Up and running immediately, but obviously unimpressed with the unnecessary dumbing down of the setup program.
A little later on, I cracked open my iWork 05 disc and stuck it in. Lo and behold, the machine refused to install the software because a later version was already installed on the machine. So I go hunting and find a trial version of iWork, which I start and am annoyed to find there is no 'enter the serial number from your boxed copy you just brought home from the store and I'll start working for you' option. So I drag the application to the trash, since that's what book said was all that was needed to uninstall an application. No dice. A call to a Mac buddy and a little Spotlight magic later and I find a couple of files in the /Library/Receipts folder, which has something to do with the auto-update feature for the software. Killing off the files and now I can install my software. This is software I bought with the machine, you realise. And the machine won't let me install it. This is not what I call 'It just works'
The rest of my installs go pretty much according to plan (after Office downloads the 50Mb of updates needed to actually get it to run properly). The only other disappointment was the Logic Express has not had the latest UI goodness like the rest of the apps that sport the Apple logo. They've done the box up nice, but the app must be one of those 'carbonised' ones they talk about.
Of course, before I could really start using the apps, I had to sort out the accessibility options. Being a visually impaired person, one of the things that tipped me to considering the Mac was the built in accessibility features, particularly the new VoiceOver software that speaks the UI to you as you use the machine. Annoying as all get out to anyone standing nearby, but pretty darn useful for me. In fact, as I type this, it's reading each word as I go. Overall, the software is good, and I can save the money I'd normally have to spend getting set up with specialist software, so I'm happy about that. It's got a few minor issues like jumping around a little crazily when the screen is magnified and the focus shifts, and not reading full paragraphs of text in Safari if they contain a (gasp!) hyperlink, but not too bad at all.
Things really started to crank when I got my head around expose, spotlight and some of the apps that come with it. iMovie is awesome in its elegance and simplicity and speed (I talk as someone who purchased Pinnacle video editing software for Windows) and iPhoto blew me away when I imported my six years worth of photos from its home in a nicely structured directory, and iPhoto turned the directory names into keywords that I can search, so 'Antonia's Wedding' instantly finds all the right pics. Awesome.
I find I'm not as productive when typing and editing text because I don't know all the keyboard shortcuts for selecting a word or a paragraph, but that will come with practice. It is true what they say that it just feels solid, and having a large number of apps open doesn't seem to have the same drag effect as it does in Windows. Now I just have to figure out how to replace all the apps I rely on like The Brain and Microsoft Money. I'm not in a great hurry as I invested in Virtual PC to ease the transition. I haven't actually used it yet, as I'm trying to just feel the vibe for now. And I must say it feels pretty gooood. I look forward to being snobbish and dismissive of my Windows colleagues very soon.
Anyway, I'm showing my age by saying it's 19 years since I last had a Mac, so I knew things would have changed quite a bit in the meantime. I've been reading 'Mac OS X The Missing Manual' while waiting for my machine to arrive so I already had some of the keyboard shortcuts down before I had the box open. Which brings me to the first of my observations about the oft-repeated cries of "It just works" by the MacCult members...don't get me wrong, this little baby is a beautiful thing, but in the interests of full disclosure, I thought I'd jot down my notes on the switching experience...
Getting the machine delivered was something Apple found quite challenging. I ordered the PowerBook, MS Office, iWork, .mac and Logic Express, and they got off to a bad start by shipping the software individually so that a couple of times when the courier's arrival at my house found nobody at home, they went away until we called them and could commit to waiting at home for a full day before they'd deliver. Not so bad for a single delivery, but when the order is part-shipped in four separate trips, this gets a bit old. Of course the software was no use without the machine, which didn't turn up at all. Problem was, the online order status page showed it as having been shipped many days ago. Several calls to the courier and Apple finally led to the discovery that the courier had returned it to Apple because the exterior box was slightly damaged in transit. Still no drama, except that Apple seemed to not have a process to keep it moving. I had to call them multiple times to get multiple people to find the box and ship it to me after testing that the machine was OK. Very annoying.
The machine arrived last Friday and with sweaty palms I fired it up. The warm, welcoming and soothing setup process came to a shuddering halt at the wireless network setup screen. No matter what I did, I could not get it to connect to my network. Now I know my 128-bit WEP key off by heart, so this should not be hard. Eventually I gave up in disgust and told it I didn't have a network at all. When I got into the OS proper, I found I had extra options, including to change its default WEP key size of 40 bits to the 128 I needed. Up and running immediately, but obviously unimpressed with the unnecessary dumbing down of the setup program.
A little later on, I cracked open my iWork 05 disc and stuck it in. Lo and behold, the machine refused to install the software because a later version was already installed on the machine. So I go hunting and find a trial version of iWork, which I start and am annoyed to find there is no 'enter the serial number from your boxed copy you just brought home from the store and I'll start working for you' option. So I drag the application to the trash, since that's what book said was all that was needed to uninstall an application. No dice. A call to a Mac buddy and a little Spotlight magic later and I find a couple of files in the /Library/Receipts folder, which has something to do with the auto-update feature for the software. Killing off the files and now I can install my software. This is software I bought with the machine, you realise. And the machine won't let me install it. This is not what I call 'It just works'
The rest of my installs go pretty much according to plan (after Office downloads the 50Mb of updates needed to actually get it to run properly). The only other disappointment was the Logic Express has not had the latest UI goodness like the rest of the apps that sport the Apple logo. They've done the box up nice, but the app must be one of those 'carbonised' ones they talk about.
Of course, before I could really start using the apps, I had to sort out the accessibility options. Being a visually impaired person, one of the things that tipped me to considering the Mac was the built in accessibility features, particularly the new VoiceOver software that speaks the UI to you as you use the machine. Annoying as all get out to anyone standing nearby, but pretty darn useful for me. In fact, as I type this, it's reading each word as I go. Overall, the software is good, and I can save the money I'd normally have to spend getting set up with specialist software, so I'm happy about that. It's got a few minor issues like jumping around a little crazily when the screen is magnified and the focus shifts, and not reading full paragraphs of text in Safari if they contain a (gasp!) hyperlink, but not too bad at all.
Things really started to crank when I got my head around expose, spotlight and some of the apps that come with it. iMovie is awesome in its elegance and simplicity and speed (I talk as someone who purchased Pinnacle video editing software for Windows) and iPhoto blew me away when I imported my six years worth of photos from its home in a nicely structured directory, and iPhoto turned the directory names into keywords that I can search, so 'Antonia's Wedding' instantly finds all the right pics. Awesome.
I find I'm not as productive when typing and editing text because I don't know all the keyboard shortcuts for selecting a word or a paragraph, but that will come with practice. It is true what they say that it just feels solid, and having a large number of apps open doesn't seem to have the same drag effect as it does in Windows. Now I just have to figure out how to replace all the apps I rely on like The Brain and Microsoft Money. I'm not in a great hurry as I invested in Virtual PC to ease the transition. I haven't actually used it yet, as I'm trying to just feel the vibe for now. And I must say it feels pretty gooood. I look forward to being snobbish and dismissive of my Windows colleagues very soon.
Sunday, May 15, 2005
Too busy to blog
Lately I've been too busy to blog, as I've been helping Simon write his first book. As far as we know, it's the first book on algorithms to use design patterns and TDD, but I could be wrong. Be sure to buy your mum one for christmas...:P
Having finally succumbed to the weight of my geek buddies buying Macs, I've just ordered a new Powerbook, so I reckon I'll be posting a bit about the experience. I've had to buy a copy of Virtual PC to ease the switch, but I'd like to retire all my Windows apps if I can.
Having finally succumbed to the weight of my geek buddies buying Macs, I've just ordered a new Powerbook, so I reckon I'll be posting a bit about the experience. I've had to buy a copy of Virtual PC to ease the switch, but I'd like to retire all my Windows apps if I can.
Sunday, March 6, 2005
A couple of views on coupling
Having read both Domain Driven Design and Hibernate in Action recently, I found an interesting contradiction between them...here's what Eric Evans has to say about promiscuous coupling between your domain classes:
"It is important to constrain relationships as much as possible. A bidirectional association means that both objects can be understood only together. When application requirements do not call for traversal in both directions, adding a traversal direction reduces interdependence and simplifies the design. Understanding the domain may reveal a natural directional bias."
...and here's what Gavin King and Christian Bauer have to say on the same subject:
"Good uses for unidirectional one-to-many associations are uncommon in practice, and we don�t
have one in our auction application. You may remember that we started with the
Item and Bid mapping in chapter 3, making it first unidirectional, but we quickly
introduced the other side of the mapping."
So I agree with Eric, but I'm using Hibernate. Things that make you go hmmmm....
"It is important to constrain relationships as much as possible. A bidirectional association means that both objects can be understood only together. When application requirements do not call for traversal in both directions, adding a traversal direction reduces interdependence and simplifies the design. Understanding the domain may reveal a natural directional bias."
...and here's what Gavin King and Christian Bauer have to say on the same subject:
"Good uses for unidirectional one-to-many associations are uncommon in practice, and we don�t
have one in our auction application. You may remember that we started with the
Item and Bid mapping in chapter 3, making it first unidirectional, but we quickly
introduced the other side of the mapping."
So I agree with Eric, but I'm using Hibernate. Things that make you go hmmmm....
Saturday, January 8, 2005
A new brain for Christmas
Software isn't the kind of thing your mother buys you for Christmas, at least not in my family (I'm a first-generation geek). So to help with my new year's resolution of being more organised (those who know me might say anal retentive), I picked myself up a christmas present of a copy of Personal Brain.
A colleague showed me the brain a year or so ago, and I used it sporadically, finding it particularly useful when triaging ideas arriving rapidly and randomly, like in requirements gathering workshops. It works really well in this kind of environment, where a little bit of thought association goes a long way. But when I noticed that a new version had come out, I thought I'd get it and this time (gasp!) I actually read the manual. What a difference that makes, I must say. Now I know the hot keys to make navigation and construction easier, and I know how to make 'thoughts' refer to files, folders and web sites, I'll be darned if it isn't a fantastic way to organise your stuff. Within a day or so of mostly input, I started to get some benefit back in rapid access to whatever I was thinking about, and was surprised at how limiting and pervasive the whole hierarchical file structure we're trained in is and how much it affects my productivity.
The brain has a very simple model of parent, child and 'jump' connections between thoughts. You can have any number of each type of link (actually there is an arbitrary limit which is kind of weird, but it's enough for my purposes) and restructuring them is simple. That's really all there is to it, and like most great ideas, that's all there needs to be.
Here's a screenshot of my brain when I'm thinking about joodi. You'll see 'parent' thoughts above the central thought, 'child' thoughts below, 'jump' thoughts to the left and siblings to the right. The funky way the window reorganises itself when you move between thoughts is worth seeing, so go get it and have a play if you're interested.
A colleague showed me the brain a year or so ago, and I used it sporadically, finding it particularly useful when triaging ideas arriving rapidly and randomly, like in requirements gathering workshops. It works really well in this kind of environment, where a little bit of thought association goes a long way. But when I noticed that a new version had come out, I thought I'd get it and this time (gasp!) I actually read the manual. What a difference that makes, I must say. Now I know the hot keys to make navigation and construction easier, and I know how to make 'thoughts' refer to files, folders and web sites, I'll be darned if it isn't a fantastic way to organise your stuff. Within a day or so of mostly input, I started to get some benefit back in rapid access to whatever I was thinking about, and was surprised at how limiting and pervasive the whole hierarchical file structure we're trained in is and how much it affects my productivity.
The brain has a very simple model of parent, child and 'jump' connections between thoughts. You can have any number of each type of link (actually there is an arbitrary limit which is kind of weird, but it's enough for my purposes) and restructuring them is simple. That's really all there is to it, and like most great ideas, that's all there needs to be.
Here's a screenshot of my brain when I'm thinking about joodi. You'll see 'parent' thoughts above the central thought, 'child' thoughts below, 'jump' thoughts to the left and siblings to the right. The funky way the window reorganises itself when you move between thoughts is worth seeing, so go get it and have a play if you're interested.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)