| I use Github and Gitlab on a daily basis, and participated (and still follow) in a project with an e-mail based workflows, the notmuch[1] project. I find that the following are better in an e-mail based workflow: - Reviewing Threaded e-mail discussions are the best for following and/or discussing pull requests. Commits or comments no longer relevant can be hidden/collapsed to allow you to focus on what you are interested or is left to review. This is still not possible fully in either Gitlab or Github. - Multiple versions of a pull request Only Gitlab has support for multiple versions of a merge request. In Github there is no history of what the previous versions of the code were (or at least you cannot not explicitly compare them as in Gitlab) - Merging into multiple branches Though not enabled directly by an e-mail based workflow, with Gitlab/Github there is no way to ask the same set of changes to be merged into different branches in the same MR, you have to open two, and then you might issues with tools that integrate with them as they might have done the assumption that one branch is not used in two different MRs. So, even though daggy fixes[2] are possible, the norm seems to be to cherry pick. - Custom styling This varies with the e-mail client, but still is way better than any web interface. [1] https://notmuchmail.org/ [2] https://wiki.monotone.ca/DaggyFixes/ |