Project Management Software for Software Development Teams in Edmonton
Edmonton's mix of university AI research and industrial-corridor engineering runs on two different clocks. ShipSprint's boards keep both honest by taking their status from GitHub, not from a card someone forgot to move.
A research team and a plant-facing engineering team, one shared failure
Ask a University of Alberta-adjacent AI researcher and an engineer running a plant along Edmonton's industrial corridor what "done" looks like, and you'll get two different answers, a published result or working prototype for one, a signed-off commissioning date for the other. Yet both groups run into the identical board problem once a task is actually wrapped up: somebody finishes the work, starts the next thing, and never gets around to dragging the card out of "in progress", so the board keeps saying something the calendar no longer agrees with.
That one stale card is enough to throw a burndown chart off, and it misleads a research lead's read on a sprint just as much as it misleads a plant engineering manager's, whichever kind of "done" they happen to be tracking. The commit history sitting underneath already tells a straighter story than the board does.
ShipSprint sidesteps the hygiene problem by reading status straight from GitHub instead of leaning on either team to be tidier. Opening a branch against a card is what moves it into progress, and merging the pull request is what closes it out, no manual dragging needed either way. Because burndown and cycle-time numbers are calculated from that same merge history, the chart stays accurate whether it's tracking open-ended research or a fixed commissioning date.
Built around merge history, not memory
The same mechanics that keep a research board honest work just as well for a date-driven engineering team.
Open a branch tied to a card and it advances on the board automatically, no drag required to reflect that work has started.
A merged pull request closes its card on its own, so the board tracks the code rather than a status field somebody clicked.
Burndown and cycle-time analytics are calculated from actual merge history, reflecting research or engineering pace honestly.
Per-column WIP limits let a research group model exploratory work honestly, while an engineering team next door runs a tighter process.
Delivery forecasts are calculated from each team's own measured pace, so a date at risk surfaces weeks before it's due.
A sprint review that doesn't start with "let me check"
Plenty of sprint reviews spend their first ten minutes on someone quietly checking whether the board actually matches the repo before anyone talks about the work itself, and that dead time costs more for a lab or plant team that's rarely at a desk to begin with and has no spare minutes for board admin. Pull status straight from GitHub and that whole reconciliation step just goes away.
A built-in wiki does real work here too, keeping a decision, a dataset note or a commissioning rationale next to the task it affects, with page history, so context survives past the one person who happened to remember it at the time. Any sentence on a page can become a task directly.
Quantuva Technologies Pvt. Ltd., the company behind ShipSprint, is based in India, and every invoice goes out in rupees, a plain fact about billing rather than a claim to being local. The support team sits in India too, roughly half a day ahead of Mountain time, and the product is designed around that offset: forecasts and the Monday digest run on their own, and a blocker gets routed to the right teammate without either side needing to find a mutually convenient hour for a call.
Questions from Edmonton dev teams
Yes. Because boards aren't locked to a fixed sprint structure, exploratory or research-driven work can be modeled honestly alongside more traditional date-driven engineering, on separate boards under the same subscription, both taking their status from GitHub where code is involved.
No, by design. No screenshots, no keystroke logging, no activity tracking, only work outcomes and hours logged by the person who worked them, visible on their own scorecard and adjusted for approved leave.
Prices are set and charged in rupees, and your card converts to Canadian dollars at whatever rate applies that day. At current rates a seat runs well below most Canadian project tools.
Free covers up to 5 users and 2 projects, permanently. Team is ₹299 per user per month, or ₹2,899 per user per year, up to 40 users. Business is ₹599 per user per month, or ₹6,499 per year, adding forecasts, scorecards and the owner command center. Full detail is on the pricing page.
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