Git Flow vs. Continuous Delivery

As far as I know, Git Flow does not make any assumptions or recommendations about testing. This is why this article seemed like it is arguing against a straw man.

For example:

> And then, git flow recommends that for going to production, you build packages from the master branch, and release them. The problem is that by building a new package or binary from the master branch, you invalidate all the testing you did in the develop branch.

It's not a problem unless you forgot to run your full test suite on the new master branch before building the release artifact, which I think is best-practice and not limited to any development methodology.