> JIRA was replaced by GitHub issues

This is absolutely... not the case.

Sure, for some kinds of projects Github Issues might do, but for anything "real" Github's issue and project management is a serious regression.

---

These tools are not replacing anything, but addressing broader and broader markets. They lower the barrier to entry and bring more people into the fold (perhaps at the expense at having a lower ceiling of functionality).

breakfastduck

I'm lost now when it comes to project / dev / story etc management tools.

No idea what the best option is, any recommendations for tools developers will actually use or do you just need to do a custom integration with github issues?

danielheath

I've long wished for a tool that (for git) what fossil has built in: issues stored in the repository, where developers can use their full range of tools to work on them locally.

A few additional things would be required to make this work for less-technical team members, and you end up building some of your own workflow, but it means that E.G. you have options like "update the description of a ticket as part of the pull request that implements it".

Izkata

Experimenting with distributed issue trackers in git was popular in the early 2010s, there were a whole bunch of different implementations people came up with for git. Most of them died out though, there were typically a few problems - this is what I remember offhand from experimenting with a whole bunch of them:

* Some of them make a mess of some part of git; one of them put its info in separate git branches you couldn't delete without breaking it, to ensure changes were always pushed/pulled even without a special push/pull command for the issue tracker.

* At least one of them kept their info in the repo in a dot-prefixed directory and auto added/committed the file as changes were made; this meant a single issue could be in different statuses depending on which branch you were on and there was no overarching view.

* The rest effectively ran in parallel to the git repo, pushing and pulling their data within it but requiring their own commands to do so, so it was totally possible to clone the repo and not get the issues.

* Most of them didn't have a non-repo way to track issues, for project managers and such. One did have a webview that ran from a repo, but it was up to you to figure out how to keep it in sync with the comments/etc devs were putting in their copies of the issue tracker.

Sibling mentions git-bug, a few others I recalled/quickly found:

https://github.com/aaiyer/bugseverywhere (I think this is one of the original ones)

https://github.com/dspinellis/git-issue

https://github.com/neithernut/git-dit

https://github.com/google/git-appraise (I think this one is newest and I probably never tried it)