It refers to 'review' as in reviewing the features and how it is implemented. Here is the log: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=2658&user=guest&pas

It refers to 'review' as in reviewing the features and how it is implemented. Here is the log: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=2658&user=guest&pass=guest http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=2658&user=guest... That is very far from it being a security review, or any real proper review. It is more a request for comments (which defaults to code being committed) You'll notice that the workflow for commits doesn't have a review stage, and it isn't implemented in the workflow software. Compare to a chromium example, where each commit, eg. http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=revision&revision=262978 http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=revision&revision... has a review stage that the original committer doesn't have permissions for. In this case 3 reviewers for that commit: https://codereview.chromium.org/231923002 https://codereview.chromium.org/231923002 Code doesn't get committed without at least 4 people, its like a 2-man rule that is enforced in the workflow. In contrast the openssl process is that the same committer can push the code after getting no objections. There is a big difference in how each of these processes work.