[daxfohl]

A common case where this doesn't work well is embedded code. You'll frequently have many different releases of your code "in production" at the same time.

I started an embedded project a while back using the gitflow style I was used to, but eventually found the meaning of "master" to be not well defined, once we had different release versions and variations. We eventually killed master, and renamed "develop" to "master", and that particular project makes much more sense now.

[davnicwil]

That makes sense, but I don't understand how renaming the branches made that problem go away.

Also, if you had different variations of builds etc (I assume for different target hardware) could it have been better organised by putting all the common code in a different project, then creating separate projects for each of the variations with that common code as a dependency? Then you could probably manage each of the variation projects with gitflow as usual.