IMHO GitFlow often works, as is a decent baseline. When people don't use GitFlow (i.e. people starting their adventure with git, with no supervision), very oft

IMHO GitFlow often works, as is a decent baseline. When people don't use GitFlow (i.e. people starting their adventure with git, with no supervision), very often they report to one of the above: - one master, and SVN-style - personal branches, and marges in all directions - even more mess Sure, they may be projects in which a different commit/branch/merge workflow is better. (In many projects I did some adaptations for GitFlow, depending on the project scope, scale and skill of programmers.) However, the original author, after a long criquite recommends nothings (to my disappointment). So, what's the point? Going back to this "anyting marges with anything" branch Wild West, as a baseline?