Question is, is it constructive? Does ranting really yield better results than just stating the facts (both short term for fixing the problem and long term for working together)?
It might work for Linus on the LKML, but it certainly doesn't for everyone and in all circumstances.
> It might work for Linus on the LKML, but it certainly doesn't for everyone and in all circumstances.
Exactly, it's cultural.
And, I wouldn't call it ranting. If you look at Linus' famous examples of this, he may first call it bullshit (calling it as it is), and then he goes on to explain why it is, and usually also explains how to polish the turd into what it should have been.
It certainly works in my experience, having been on both ends of this sort of communication.
It tells you that your quality has fallen well and truly below the expected level of output.
But it isn't something held against you either. Because in these same cultures, it is okay to make a mistake, even costly ones. Because they make you better.
I've shown you that what you made is crap, and why it is crap. So now I know that you know that sort of thing is crap, and will strive to make something better. And you also know I won't turn around tomorrow and remind you of it, because you're passed it. Probably not even in jest.
It might work for Linus on the LKML, but it certainly doesn't for everyone and in all circumstances.