The linux kernel, which is open source and does want contributors, is doing more-or-less just fine with an email-based PR and review flow. If it's an open sour

The linux kernel, which is open source and does want contributors, is doing more-or-less just fine with an email-based PR and review flow. If it's an open source project, it should be using an open source review platform that allows improvements and specialization of the code hosting too. Using github, where the review tools are bad and can't be improved by an outsider, is a slap in the face to open source. Frankly, I'm tired of people using github. The fact that it still doesn't have any idea of patchsets and diffs between them is cripplingly bad (i.e. you force push a new version of your change, there's no easy way to review the diff between the old and new version of your change). Having to use yet more third party tools, like https://reviewable.io https://reviewable.io, isn't an answer to this, it's just a sign that github should be open source so these could be forks or first-party tools. It's also just insulting for an open source project to force people to use a proprietary platform owned by microsoft.