Yes, and this is how things were supposed to go before PRs. Whenever PR requirements are added, it's always because the described process does not work in reality and mainline ends up filling with crap as developers under pressure try to rush their prio-1 features out the door.
> This practice has become so common that many people consider it a default, “best” practice. Some people assume there is no other way to make sure code is reviewed because they’ve never seen anything else.
And you can see this in the comments on this post: a few are "we did trunk based development and it didn't work, so we switched to pull requests", but most are "we do pull requests, and i can't see how trunk-based development could possibly work", so not reporting a switch based on experience.
And (as you may have seen me mention, sorry), i have been doing TBD for years, and have mostly not had a problem with the trunk filling up with crap.
