From owner-freebsd-office@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Aug  9 22:30:16 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-office@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: office@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DA84CD7
 for <office@FreeBSD.org>; Sat,  9 Aug 2014 22:30:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 768DC20C5
 for <office@FreeBSD.org>; Sat,  9 Aug 2014 22:30:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118])
 by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s79MUG4D098177
 for <office@FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 9 Aug 2014 22:30:16 GMT
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To: office@FreeBSD.org
Subject: [Bug 192537] Port Update: devel/boost-*
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2014 22:30:16 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC AssignedTo
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports Tree
X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s)
X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me
X-Bugzilla-Who: marino@FreeBSD.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: Open
X-Bugzilla-Priority: Normal
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: office@FreeBSD.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cc assigned_to
Message-ID: <bug-192537-25061-4ihEzwJb8V@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-192537-25061@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-192537-25061@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: freebsd-office@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: Office applications on FreeBSD <freebsd-office.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-office>,
 <mailto:freebsd-office-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-office/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-office@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-office-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-office>,
 <mailto:freebsd-office-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2014 22:30:16 -0000

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192537

John Marino <marino@FreeBSD.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|Needs Triage                |Open
                 CC|                            |marino@FreeBSD.org
           Assignee|freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD. |office@FreeBSD.org
                   |org                         |

--- Comment #2 from John Marino <marino@FreeBSD.org> ---
Jordan, I'm assigning this to the maintainer as well, but I am curious about
the motivation.

Do you realize that each time boost is updated, dozens of ports break?  The
fact that office@ owns it tells me openoffice / libreoffice are also sensitive
the version.  I think at the very least you are looking a an EXP-RUN to figure
out what the damage would be.

So that said, why are proposing to the boost maintainer to update this before
they feel it's necessary?  Like I said, I am mainly curious.  There's no wrong
answer.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.