exactly. I used the term master because that's what we are using internally. We could have called it foobar of course :-) For the poster of the article, a stab

exactly. I used the term master because that's what we are using internally. We could have called it foobar of course :-) For the poster of the article, a stable (i.e slow moving) master was important, for us stable release branches. The head of their master only uses as new releases are made. Our master moves constantly and releases are tagged on the release-branches. It's really just a matter of terminology though. Another point I wanted to make with my post was that you don't need as many branches as the original article for quite the same advantages.