[PragmaticPulp]

I was on a team that tried it. It didn’t work well for us.

Actual issue trackers are far more efficient. Juggling pull requests, code review, and inevitable things like edit conflicts and rebases is a small price to pay for code that people are working on for hours at a time. However, it’s way too much overhead to simply manage issues. It’s not fun to have to type a lot of commands and click around code review to accomplish the same thing I can do in a few seconds with a couple clicks in an issue tracker.

The system also hits a dead end as soon as you want to bring non-coders into the loop. It’s not fun when your managers have to go through a coder to get guidance to interact with the issue tracker.

[arthurquerou]

Thanks a lot for the feedback! Which issue tracker would you recommend? Jira?

[PragmaticPulp]

Jira is fine, but only if you have someone on staff trained to use Jira properly. Jira has way, way too many configuration options that lure companies into creating overly complicated workflows and adding new complications until everyone gets sick of Jira.

A better starter option might be something like Asana or even a shared Trello board. Your priority should be to keep it as simple as possible and resist complexity as long as possible.