Project Tracking Software
Tracking shouldn't require someone to ask "where's this at?" ShipSprint reads the answer off the work itself, several times a day, without anyone typing an update.
Status meetings exist to patch a broken feedback loop
The standard fix for "we don't know where things are" is a recurring meeting where everyone says where things are. It works, sort of, for the fifteen minutes it happens in, and then drifts stale by Thursday because nothing keeps it current in between.
ShipSprint tracks by reading signals that already exist rather than collecting new ones. A card's column tells you its status. A merged pull request closes it. A logged hour tells you who's actually working on what. None of that is typed in for tracking's sake; it's a byproduct of doing the work.
The result isn't a report about the project. It's the project, viewed at whatever moment you're looking.
That distinction sounds small until you notice how much organisational effort goes into the alternative. Someone has to schedule the meeting, someone has to chase the people who didn't reply to the update thread, someone has to reconcile two conflicting accounts of the same task's status. All of that is coordination overhead spent making a report accurate for a few hours. ShipSprint spends none of it, because there's nothing separate from the work to keep accurate.
What moves the needle without anyone touching it
Four inputs, none of them a status update.
On Team plan and above, opening a branch shifts a card into progress and a merged pull request closes it, so an engineering board tracks the code, instead of describing it a day later.
Hours get logged next to the task that was just finished, in about five seconds, rather than reconstructed from memory on a Friday. Missing a day reminds the person directly, not their manager.
Delivery dates are calculated from the team's measured velocity as sprints close, so a slipping date shows up weeks before it's due, not on the day it was.
Anyone can flag "I'm blocked" from their own day view, which pulls in the right person with context already attached, instead of a message that sits unread.
The owner command center pulls live status across every team into one screen, and a digest lands Monday morning without anyone compiling it by hand.
A bug fix, watched instead of reported on
Say a payments bug gets flagged Monday morning. Under the old model, it goes on a card, and the only way anyone downstream knows it's moving is if the engineer remembers to say so in standup, which is fine until standup is Tuesday and the fix ships Monday night with nobody the wiser until Wednesday's meeting.
In ShipSprint, the moment the engineer opens a branch named after the card, the card itself shifts into an "in progress" column. No one typed that. When the fix is done and the pull request merges, the card closes itself. If the engineer hits a snag waiting on a database migration someone else owns, one tap says "I'm blocked," and that person gets pulled in with the card's context already attached, rather than a vague message asking if anyone's free.
By the time anyone asks "did the payments bug get fixed," the answer has been sitting on the board since the merge happened, not since the next meeting where someone remembered to mention it.
Tracking is the read; planning is the write
It helps to keep these separate: planning decides what enters a sprint and how much fits; tracking is just what happens to that commitment afterward. ShipSprint doesn't ask you to keep a tracking document in sync with a planning document, because there's only the one board. Planning writes to it, tracking reads from it.
That's also why tracking data is trustworthy here in a way a self-reported status field isn't. A card's position isn't someone's opinion about progress; it's where the card is.
What this actually replaces
It's worth naming the habits this is meant to remove, because they're usually so normal nobody notices the cost. The end-of-day Slack update: "worked on X today, should be done tomorrow." The Friday status email summarising a week from memory. The spreadsheet a project coordinator maintains by asking each team lead individually, then reconciling the answers.
None of those disappear because ShipSprint asks people to stop doing them; they disappear because they stop being necessary. The update is already visible in the card's column. The week's summary is already sitting in the hours logged and the cards closed. The coordinator's spreadsheet would just be a slower, hand-copied version of the dashboard that already exists.
What's left for a person to actually do is the five-second log next to a finished task, and a tap when something's genuinely stuck. Everything else that used to be "reporting" gets read off the work instead of typed about it. Teams that move onto ShipSprint usually feel this first as an absence: the Friday status email just stops arriving, because nobody's writing one.
What it costs to track this way
- Free tracks up to 5 users and 2 projects with the full board and hour-logging, no expiry.
- Team, at ₹299 per user per month or ₹2,899 a year, adds GitHub sync so branches and pull requests move and close cards themselves.
- Business, ₹599 per user per month or ₹6,499 a year, adds delivery forecasting and the owner command center; every paid trial runs on full Business access for 14 days with a sample project preloaded. See pricing.
No activity metrics, ever
None of this comes from watching people work. ShipSprint takes no screenshots, logs no keystrokes and tracks no idle time. Tracking here means tracking the work, not the worker. Scorecards are built from outcomes and leave-adjusted, and they're visible to the person they describe, not just their manager.
Ask the workspace directly, too. Connected to Claude and ChatGPT, a question like "what moved in the last two days?" gets answered from the live board rather than whoever remembers to post an update.
Common questions
No. Status comes from column position and code activity, not a field people fill in. The only manual input is logging hours, which takes about five seconds because it sits right next to the task.
Opening a branch tied to a card moves it into progress; a merged pull request closes it. It's one-way from code to board, so the board can't say something is done that the code doesn't back up. Available on Team plan and above.
They recalculate as sprints close, from your team's own completed work, not a fixed estimate set at planning time. A new team needs a couple of sprints of history before forecasts are worth trusting.
Only leave-adjusted outcome scorecards, and the person they're about can see them too. There's no activity or keystroke data collected, so there's nothing hidden feeding a number you can't see. Security detail is at security.
Then it moves the way every non-engineering task does: someone drags it across the board as work progresses. GitHub sync is an addition for engineering cards, not a requirement for tracking to work.
Board position, hours and forecasts are visible to everyone on the project, not held back for managers only. The one thing kept private by default is other people's individual scorecards, and even those are visible to the person they describe.
Plenty of teams still meet, for judgment calls, planning discussions and the human parts of working together. What tends to disappear is the meeting that only exists to collect status, because the board already has it before anyone sits down.
Related pages
See it on your own work.
A workspace your whole company will actually use is 60 seconds away. No card, no risk, nothing to install.
14-day full-access trial · sample project included · no card required