I guess since there is no quote retweet here,
https://social.kernel.org/notice/ARLXuuUYGeIWtYMHbs

>every new contributor has to build that list from scratch and suffer until they figured it out.

Whenever I write something critical I think of one of the reviews I received early on, for something that was admittedly sub-par, and hope not to come across the way that email did.

I hope I do manage not to come across as an asshole.

@llvm @marcan

How to **help** them stay idiosyncratic??? I need to go watch that.

@marcan

>To be clear, reasonable code quality comments aren't the problem, and helping out less experienced folks in a kind way is a tangential (but also important and frequently related) issue.

Yah, agreed. Especially the "frequently related" bit.
I was interpreting the "every new contributor has to build that list from scratch" with a bit of a focus on the "how to deal with them" bit & maybe I focused on that part too much as it kinda resonated with me. I just don't wanna be someone that people have to learn to deal with!

w.r.t the second paragraph:
I didn't think you were suggesting that people should take bad code. Sorry if it came across that way at all.
The alignment thing you suggested is a good example - I never know if I can or can't change that stuff in a patch that I add something, which is just silly.
Another one that I find silly is "that's not the right way to do x", without any hints as to what the right way might be. Certainly feel like the knowledge about how linux works is being gatekept in situations like that.

I've seen at least one of the interactions you're referring to (and probably can guess who the list.txt maintainer is).
One thing that is kinda frustrating is not knowing which maintainers are willing to fix up x, y or z on application and which want a respin for a $subject change.
Reviewing patches as a non-maintainer is a bit of an odd spot. If you don't mention some nit in v5 of a trivial driver, there's a chance noone spots it & if there's a v6 it'd not change. Not the end of the world I guess though most of the time.
I feel bad as said reviewer when someone re-submits to fix something that could likely be fixed on application, but not as if I can speak for the actual maintainer.

@marcan I'm not trying to defend any silliness, but I do at least understand why people make the comments at times.
In the non-mantainer case in particular, I often feel like there is "over-eagerness" involved too, and feel guilty of that myself at times as a non-maintainer reviewer of something. I suspect that there's a lot of heart in the right place involved without seeing the other side of it.

>At some point it's just time to let go because the experience for the submitter is just awful and it's not worth it.

Yup. I'm unimportant and in a small corner of the world, but probably worth seeing what can be improved in said corner.

@marcan Oh yeah, that that *is* what I try to do. I try for something like "if for another reason you need to submit a vN, blah blah blah, otherwise looks good" etc, but I feel bad and it often gets misunderstood.

@marcan swap that around, "it often gets misunderstood, and I feel bad",

@llvm @marcan ohh that nails how I feel!

@llvm @marcan So I did go watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzdpO3kyoE0 & it's not as bad as I expected it to be. The goal there does actually seem fairly aligned - making the experience less frustrating for contributors & maintainers.
But at the same time, yeah documenting differences is less helpful to contributors than dropping the differences altogether. And some of the stuff, like suggesting maintainers should document that they commit their own material without sending it out for review instead of just not doing it I would have to disagree with.
Hard subject to even attempt to stand up and make "directed" suggestions about at LPC though!