&gt;and the whole GH workflow seems to encourage something pretty clearly outside the realm of continuous integration<p>The reason for this isn&#x27;t clear to me. PRs are nothing but a `git merge` wrapped in a web ui that shows you a preview of the diff. Since those concepts are equivalent you have to then say &quot;merging is pretty clearly outside the realm of continuous integration&quot;, but I&#x27;d say thats the concept that makes CI possible. By virtue of their equivalence PRs(if you choose to use them) can make CI possible too.<p>I want to be super clear about this using &quot;Forking&quot; and &quot;Pull Requests&quot; have zero limitations when it comes to CI&#x2F;CD. In fact compared to working out of a shared repo there is only exactly one difference. Since your clone&#x27;s master can diverge from authoritative master you have to periodically synchronize masters(thats that &quot;sync your fork&quot; link I put in the original post) I&#x27;ll admit this is almost a justification for not using forks. Its annoying and tedious to explain to new git users.<p>&gt;It&#x27;s not continuous at all -- it places the onus of &quot;merges&quot; on people looking at stuff instead of trusting the tests<p>This sounds a bit off to me. Continuous integration is about getting good code into the delivery pipeline. Once that code is there you want to get it public as quick as possible. There is a relationship that describes the cost of bugs and bad design decisions as exponential given their proximity to getting into the customers hands. The tests will find regressions but won&#x27;t stop a bad design or a design with a new bug, or a piece code without any tests at all. There are two things to note here catching things early is hugely cost effective and that code reviews are a vehicle for probing a completely different class of problems. The GH workflow is built around code reviews. This is because in the &quot;Social Coding&quot; model you want to make sure whatever rando is delivering code into your repo is respecting your style&#x2F;development guide. Most organizations want this benefit as well. Do code reviews slow things down? ... yes. But I&#x27;d say thats a feature not a bug :) Are &quot;pull requests&quot; not &quot;continuous&quot;. I don&#x27;t understand exactly what you mean by that or what its value is. But it doesn&#x27;t seem terribly useful by itself.