That's fair. At the time, though, it wasn't clear that the author's angle was that FreeBSD doesn't have a culture of doing code reviews. We do, and I don't think one has to look very hard to see that.
The FreeBSD organization should not have had to be told what issues this incident raises, so this response raises one more flag about how the organization is handling it.
This defensiveness in FreeBSD's response, this reaction of minimizing rather than facing up to the seriousness of the problem revealed here, the attempt to redirect the conversation towards anything but the specific issue, only reinforces the impression that FreeBSD may not be ready to deal with it effectively.
Of course, as FreeBSD is open source, its users are in no position to demand anything, but any potential user may, and should, attempt to determine how likely it is meet her needs in all respects.
Well, at least once code was committed without being thoroughly reviewed. Clearly FreeBSD’s development process needs some refinement to ensure that the entire code is actually reviewed during a code review.
This defensiveness in FreeBSD's response, this reaction of minimizing rather than facing up to the seriousness of the problem revealed here, the attempt to redirect the conversation towards anything but the specific issue, only reinforces the impression that FreeBSD may not be ready to deal with it effectively.
Of course, as FreeBSD is open source, its users are in no position to demand anything, but any potential user may, and should, attempt to determine how likely it is meet her needs in all respects.