From owner-freebsd-office@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Sep 20 05:30:36 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-office@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: office@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3675106566B
	for <office@freebsd.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:30:36 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from maho.nakata@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com
	[209.85.210.182])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EA748FC0C
	for <office@freebsd.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:30:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by iadk27 with SMTP id k27so319805iad.13
	for <office@freebsd.org>; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 22:30:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=sender:date:message-id:to:cc:subject:from:in-reply-to:references
	:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=vRwpiLSxcRGFgHNyGYQmd4DJ6pwgDz7f9kJ9V0M1be8=;
	b=QIEuiMllto4xJtTIrG4KbzeXkRTcPaTTmUR7PGSgOfFZPPpKLjI35oXq5dJTDF4R4Y
	5Mwxstvqsnhdrnqgl2aRxUfmUTfUy+Fm5LuowPzmzZaaHL9j1JykjrOUmvWmtMxwY2ec
	jFFhj7rzVeeRgArTsfP3wMNwCPFALkFAmReQE=
Received: by 10.42.135.129 with SMTP id p1mr662021ict.56.1316494977429;
	Mon, 19 Sep 2011 22:02:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (rikad42.riken.jp. [134.160.214.42])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id bk20sm605701ibb.2.2011.09.19.22.02.54
	(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 19 Sep 2011 22:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Maho NAKATA <maho.nakata@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:02:57 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <20110920.140257.650619413058079829.chat95@mac.com>
To: bapt@FreeBSD.org
From: Maho NAKATA <chat95@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <20110919150353.GB90102@azathoth.lan>
References: <20110919150353.GB90102@azathoth.lan>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.3 on Emacs 23.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: office@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Any reason to keep OpenOffice.org 2 in the tree?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-office@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Office applications on FreeBSD <freebsd-office.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:30:36 -0000

From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Any reason to keep OpenOffice.org 2 in the tree?
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:03:53 +0200

> Hi,
> 
> This is an open question, in particular direction of maho@ :)
> 
> Do we really need to keep OpenOffice.org 2.* in the ports tree?

No, please remove it.

> it is vulnerable, 
right.
> and I'm not sure we still have users for OpenOffice.org 2.x. But I may be wrong

thanks
-- Nakata Maho http://accc.riken.jp/maho/ , JA OOO http://ja.openoffice.org/
http://blog.goo.ne.jp/nakatamaho/ ,GPG: http://accc.riken.jp/maho/maho.pgp.txt