From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jul 11 20:40:49 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8F021065672;
	Mon, 11 Jul 2011 20:40:49 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu)
Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu
	[128.95.76.21])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F8BC8FC12;
	Mon, 11 Jul 2011 20:40:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost.apl.washington.edu
	[127.0.0.1])
	by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id
	p6BKenYF099021; Mon, 11 Jul 2011 13:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu)
Received: (from sgk@localhost)
	by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id
	p6BKenuY099020; Mon, 11 Jul 2011 13:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from sgk)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 13:40:49 -0700
From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
To: Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110711204049.GA98996@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
References: <20110706162811.GA68436@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
	<CACqU3MVLr5VXRovs1uV+zHazJi2rrjE9Sp3XzsCPJ0Un06pmDQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110706193636.GA69550@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
	<4E14CCE5.4050906@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
	<CAJ-VmomNcbGggbQePi2kBC7uRJm3BenMNKjsqkH5hFLqudsCvg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110707015151.GB71966@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
	<CAJ-VmongFDGi0amaqod5_NBQcH+guA5QMXtttCjTD=ccB==+UQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACqU3MVv-YpttXWYnvraR3PT9nh9P1AWMxoXJPevMRhNt4cr5g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJ-VmokC+pzoB_x31UGSNt2oRLXfzOK9aXhCMR3FBm7iGEyaAQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACqU3MXVdQfYEBNb9OLnt7CudiBRdvaq3Cd_HXBC8ZrCpmRFvg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CACqU3MXVdQfYEBNb9OLnt7CudiBRdvaq3Cd_HXBC8ZrCpmRFvg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>,
	FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, "Hartmann,
	O." <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de>,
	arrowdodger <6yearold@gmail.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 20:40:49 -0000

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 04:33:44PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
> 
> For the record, I would like to see enforced public review for _every_
> patch *before* it is checked in, as a strong rule. gcc system is
> particularly interesting. But it is not likely to happen in FreeBSD
> where FreeBSD committers are clearly more free than other at
> checking-in un-publicly-reviewed stuff (especially _bad_ stuff).
> 
> This would of course apply even to long-time committers, no matter how
> it hurt their ego (which I definitively do not care about).
> 

As a long time GCC committer, I think that you have grossly
over-simplified the GCC review process and how a submitted
patch is approved for committing.

-- 
Steve