Project Management Software for Software Development Teams in San Jose
South Bay engineers are allergic to a tool that exists to produce a status report for someone who isn't writing code. ShipSprint reads the board off the commit instead.
A board that reports what the repo already knows
San Jose and the South Bay around it run on deep technical execution, chip design, systems software, cloud infrastructure, work where "done" often means "verified," not "launched." Engineers here have a low tolerance for process that exists purely to generate a status report for someone who isn't writing code, and a sprint board that has to be manually kept in sync is exactly that kind of process, dressed up as project management.
The problem isn't unique to hardware-adjacent work, it's the standard failure of every board that depends on a human remembering to drag a card: an engineer merges a fix and moves straight to the next problem, because updating a field was never the actual task. What's different here is how quickly the drift compounds on long, correctness-focused timelines, where a bug caught late costs far more than one caught early, and a stale board hides exactly the kind of drift that needs catching soonest.
ShipSprint's answer is to let the data an engineer already produces do the reporting. A branch tied to a card moves it across the board automatically, and a merged pull request closes the card without anyone touching a field. Burndown and cycle-time analytics build themselves from that same merge history, so the board reflects the repo instead of a separate system someone has to keep in sync by hand.
What actually changes on an engineering board
Fewer required fields, fewer approval steps standing between a decision and the board reflecting it.
Open a branch tied to a card and it advances across the board automatically, a direct link, not a courtesy update.
A merged pull request closes its card, so "done" on the board means merged, not that someone remembered to say so.
Burndown and cycle-time analytics build themselves from actual merges, not from a chart drawn in a planning offsite and defended long after.
Boards carry per-column WIP limits, and new requests land in a triage inbox instead of straight into an engineer's queue, forcing a real conversation about what stops before something new starts.
Delivery forecasts are calculated from the team's measured velocity as sprints complete, so drift surfaces weeks before it's due, not on the morning it's supposed to ship.
When the specialist who can answer is two buildings away
Campuses across the South Bay tend to spread even one company across several buildings, and hardware-adjacent work often involves specialists on electrical, firmware and validation who may not sit anywhere near each other even on the same campus. "Walk over and ask" is often not actually faster than a well-routed message, it just feels like it should be, and a board that already reflects reality removes the need to ask at all.
A built-in wiki keeps design decisions next to the code they affect, with page history, and any line in it can become a task without copying it elsewhere. For an engineering org that already lives in a terminal or an editor most of the day, checking a card's board position is a meaningfully lower-friction way to get an answer than opening a dashboard and filtering through it.
None of this depends on watching engineers more closely. There are no screenshots, no keystroke logging and no activity tracking anywhere in the product. Scorecards reflect merged work and logged hours, visible to the person they describe, adjusted for leave. ShipSprint is built by Quantuva Technologies Pvt. Ltd., based in India, and billing runs in rupees with invoices provided for every charge. There's no South Bay office and no claim of one.
Questions from San Jose dev teams
It's meant to sit on top of your GitHub workflow, not replace it. Branches move cards, merged pull requests close them, and burndown and cycle-time analytics are generated from that activity, so the board reflects what's actually happening in the repo.
The charge on your card or invoice is denominated in rupees rather than dollars, same mechanics as any SaaS subscription otherwise. For a US team the practical upshot is cost: per seat, it tends to run at a fraction of typical US-market pricing. Check the pricing page for current numbers.
No. No screenshots, no keystroke logging, no activity tracking. Scorecards reflect merged work and logged hours, are visible to the person they describe, and are adjusted for leave.
Team is ₹299 per user per month, Business is ₹599 and adds forecasts, scorecards, the owner command center and SSO. Both plans include a 14-day full-access trial with a sample project preloaded, no card needed. Full pricing 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