Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Other LLM-related topics - tags, newcomers, etc

> I'd go so far as to say that we DON'T want to feed unfiltered LKML archives
> into the model -- we probably want to lean on the work done by the cregit
> folks to identify patch sets that were actually accepted and then work
> backwards, creating a subset of LKML that resulted in accepted contributions.

I'm not an LLM person....

Is there no value in looking at patches which got rejected, and why
they got rejected, as a template what not to do?

As a reviewer, most of what i do is tell people what they got wrong,
please change it to do it this way instead. An LLM that can parrot me
when it sees the same errors would be useful, when it is doing
reviews.

    Andrew