Because we don't care about the commits on the feature branches, we prefer doing a regular merge, not a rebase of the feature branch, so that there's no need for force pushing at any point. We consider a force push of any kind to be unnecessarily dangerous.
The tool will handle the merge up for you, but if there are conflicts you'll have to resolve them before you can release the feature.
and how would you update a pull request branch to contain the latest master? Merge back and forth?
From the looks of it, this tool is made for the force-push flow, which doesn't suit you. See https://github.com/reenhanced/gitreflow/issues/52
It would be great if we could be perfect, but sometimes small commits to master do have to happen. All we do is make sure we subject every feature to code review and acceptance before it gets to master. If it slips through, then it's technically a new change request in our eyes
Do you merge master into feature branches between the time the feature branch is first pushed to the remote and when they are reviewed and ready to merge? Can your command line tool handle creating a squashed commit when master has been merged into the feature branch a few times?