This article is a criticism of our favorite Facebook of coding by the name of Github.com. Despite that, some points apply to other projects like Gitlab, Gitea or Gogs.
OP, are you the author of the post?
I agree with the overall sentiment but I also think that the web-based contribution model works well for people who lack experience with git, or don’t want to mess with git or the command line. With emails, you have to learn at least how to make patch files and how to email them. With the web interfaces you can copy a repository, make small changes, and submit your contribution without learning git. I think the blog post resonates more with pro users than any other users. Perhaps what emails need is a better client for working with git. An alternative that is not mentioned in the post is federation of the web instances.
Anyway, I agree with the issues raised by the post so much so that I’ve also explored possible solutions, including emails.
I am not the author of the post, but I thought it was relevant. I think web-based contribution doesn’t comply with git essential workflow models, mostly because git was made with the command line and unix mail utilities in mind. Ultimately everyone can use what is in their skill set, but the interaction between web-based contributors and those who actually learned git has brought many problems. You could drive a car with a bicycle handle, but someday you may have problems with that set up.
Regarding email clients i recommend aerc Which is pretty much what many of free software devs use nowadays.
It is not fun to register to thousands of mailing lists and bug trackers.