-
```
There isn't any reason we should require OARC to do it. We have the data
already.
```
Original issue reported on code.google.com by `helixblue` on 7 Jun 2010 at 5:57
-
```
There isn't any reason we should require OARC to do it. We have the data
already.
```
Original issue reported on code.google.com by `helixblue` on 7 Jun 2010 at 5:57
-
![20160912170057_1](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/18079316/18430558/aa5ef38c-790b-11e6-882a-3815919f807b.jpg)
-
```
There isn't any reason we should require OARC to do it. We have the data
already.
```
Original issue reported on code.google.com by `helixblue` on 7 Jun 2010 at 5:57
-
```
There isn't any reason we should require OARC to do it. We have the data
already.
```
Original issue reported on code.google.com by `helixblue` on 7 Jun 2010 at 5:57
-
```
There isn't any reason we should require OARC to do it. We have the data
already.
```
Original issue reported on code.google.com by `helixblue` on 7 Jun 2010 at 5:57
-
```
There isn't any reason we should require OARC to do it. We have the data
already.
```
Original issue reported on code.google.com by `helixblue` on 7 Jun 2010 at 5:57
-
```
There isn't any reason we should require OARC to do it. We have the data
already.
```
Original issue reported on code.google.com by `helixblue` on 7 Jun 2010 at 5:57
-
```
There isn't any reason we should require OARC to do it. We have the data
already.
```
Original issue reported on code.google.com by `helixblue` on 7 Jun 2010 at 5:57
-
```
There isn't any reason we should require OARC to do it. We have the data
already.
```
Original issue reported on code.google.com by `helixblue` on 7 Jun 2010 at 5:57