Feeling that even they don’t understand what all their epics, stories and milestones do haunted me all the time. Page load times up to 10 seconds and totally unusable on a big screen (just insanely slow after window size bigger then on avarage laptops).
Convincing my company to switch to Linear was better than any holiday.
Plus no way to open up issue tracking to the public.
Linear was my go-to and I signed up today. I used it at getweave.com and loved using it there
One of the best features of Linear is that it inspires my team to build better software, not just tick feature boxes.
Their pricing and feature breakdown across plans is a joke. Milestones, reporting and roadmap are all top tier features? They're base features on a product like this.
Management products are used by engineers LAST. You project management stuff beyond your own Trello/TODO.txt once someone from management tells you to.
I had the complete exact opposite experience. I actually do wish we are still on jira.
it's slow. It's filters make no sense. It's entire flow make no sense.
What flow? It’s a task management software, not a traffic system. I don’t want it manipulating the flow of anything. It provides swimlanes and that’s more than enough for me. I can move any task anywhere at any time which is exactly what I want out of a software — for it to get out of the way.
That's where you've lost nearly all the people.
Who in their right mind crafts filters. What does this even mean?
It is impossible to tell how many times I tried to filter out something in Jira only to have everything since before the times or absolutely nothing and needed to scratch that and go back to the defaults. Or hunt down the email with an exact link to the issue.
You use simple built in filters like "site:x" or "in: folder". There's no "crafting" or involved.
> You combine a set of available filters to make a composed filter the same way you search anything
This isn't even remotely similar to "anyone who uses a search engine, tries to find an email". Which brings us back to the original complaint, quote: "It's filters make no sense."
If you "have to combine/craft filters to create a composite filter that you then use to search", you've failed. In exactly the same ways that Jira fails at this task.
I never said whether I was or wasn't using Shortcut.
> Use Linear instead, for example, since apparently
I never said whether or not I was looking for an alternative
> don’t pretend like JIRA is the only reasonable option
I never said anything about JIRA except in the following context: "If you <make things complicated>, you've failed. In exactly the same ways that Jira fails at this task." And you are the one who actually mentioned JIRA first.
So how about: you stop pretending I said or implied something I never did?
>I never said anything about JIRA except in the following context
That's exactly why I ended my last comment the way I did ("not saying you were necessarily").
> I never said whether or not I was looking for an alternative
Why are you commenting on this thread? The whole point was to suggest an alternative. You never even suggested another way filters could work. As far as I can tell, the mathematical definition of a filter is that it's composed of sub-filters. So please either admit you're a negativity-spouting troll or contribute something positive.
I responded to this statement: "You craft the filters, so if that makes no sense it’s because you didn’t craft the right thing".
No. No one in their right mind wants to "craft filters". If you require people to "craft filters" or "combine a set of available filters to make a composed filter", you've failed. It doesn't mater if it's Shortcut, or Linera, or JIRA, or any of the dozens of JIRA replacements/wannabes.
That's the thing I'm responding to. An all your examples and allusions only serve to show that you don't understand this simple fact.
For people to want to "combine/craft filters" these filters have to be immediate, smart, autocompleting, and properly predictive. As an example, Youtrack[1] shows how to do that more-or-less properly (though it has other issues). Shortcut can't even complete available states when you type `state:` into the search box.
> As far as I can tell, the mathematical definition of a filter is that it's composed of sub-filters.
Literally no one using project management software cares about mathematical definition of filter. Not a single soul.
You should strongly question this assumption because I am a living counterexample. Before I discovered this tool, I wanted to be able to write the filters so badly I even started to develop a tool that allowed this (called Infinitix) that provided only one basic thing: ability to apply filters on a single list of tickets, and then save or share that filter to other members of your org. Regardless of whether you think "you've failed" if you develop this, I'm sure photographers thought the same thing about Photoshop when it was created. (No, this product never fully materialized, luckily I didn't have to build it because I found out about the existence of Shortcut.) It would have been the simplest task management system possible, in a way.
I don't care if the autocompletions are there, what I care about is having control instead of my system administrator or manager having control, and being able to run whatever query at whatever time I want to. In other words, I want to control the tool rather than it control me, and I also want a tool (instead of TODO.txt, the anti-tool approach to task management).
One counterexample in an ocean of examples doesn't amount to much.
> Regardless of whether you think "you've failed" if you develop this, I'm sure photographers thought the same thing about Photoshop
If only you could have the will to abstain from inapplicable analogies
> I don't care if the autocompletions are there, what I care about is having control
Yeah that's a very shitty control you have. If you really need "mathematical definition of filters", make sure they are, you know, useful. See short video: https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipOFZ9y-R-tu0XCMfOhqdRW_... (switch to 1080p if needed)
You clearly didn't understand what I showed you. Watch the video again.
> There's no limit to the variety of analogies you can dismiss if you simply allow yourself to declare them inapplicable
Of course. Analogies never work they way you think they work. At best analogies are dubious claims that need to be proven. You equated Shortcuts to Photoshop, and that analogy is not even tenuous. It's false.
> As for control, it sounds good to me. Honestly, not being able to run reporting is a feature
WHo said anything about reporting? Oh wait, no one, except you.
We were talking about filters, and this is directly related to the filter functionality that you're so intent on defending.
> I'm a bit done here since you are one of these people who refuse to use analogies to inform their thinking.
I don't refuse to use analogies. However, I refuse to use false analogies, and I also refuse to use only analogies to inform my thinking. I prefer facts over analogies.
> many billions of people over the years have found analogies to be a useful endeavor
And once again you're veering into some completely unrelated tangent that no one is talking about.
> Douglas Hofstadter has a good talk about analogy
If only you had the will and comprehension to keep with the topic at hand without resorting to inventing arguments for other people, overusing false and inapplicable analogies etc.
I've been semi-tracking them because they're a local NYC Clojure shop and had wondered how they were handling the social network name overlap. Glad to hear they're still around.
The primary downside is that viewing history (closed tasks) is complete shit. They have an API, and that's the only way of getting history out in any sort of convenient format to review. A very strange oversight.
I'm also not sure how well it would scale to large teams.
Loading an epic may last 10-15 seconds, triggering the buttons to open the pop-ups menu is sluggish, etc.
I think the main problem is that the browser has to render so many elements, most of them are not even related to the page I am opening. For example, opening a story, it loads behind hundreds of cards before opening the "modal" dialog.
These modal dialogs are the most frustrating experience in SC – they close with the ESC key while you are writing, and it already happened the story I was writing was not saved, despite the obnoxious toast alerts saying the contrary. Modals also often breaks "modals menu" in Safari placing them in random places of the UI. They don't use the whole viewport so there's lot of distracting noise in the whole UI.
Some time ago there was some weird cartoonish animations popping out during my work. What a nice idea to consume even more browser resources and get into the middle of your workflow :(