harshithmul

Plane.so is indeed a great tool, and they emphasize creating an unopinionated platform that can be utilized by anyone.

Our approach, however, is AI-first. We are focused on integrating multiple AI agents into our tool to assist stakeholders in various ways, including automating manual tasks, providing enhanced context, and even resolving issues end-to-end. Our goal is to leverage AI to significantly boost productivity and streamline workflows for our users.

Thank you for your suggestion. You’re absolutely right; we are actively exploring licensing options, including AGPL, to ensure that our product remains protected.

We value input from the community and are open to suggestions and assistance in making this decision. Our goal is to prevent unauthorized copying and resale of our product under different names while fostering a collaborative and innovative environment.

Current AI functionalities: 1. AI-generated Titles 2. Smart Delegation 3. Duplicate Detection 4. AI Summarization 5. AI filtering 6. Automated Triaging

Cohere: To improve smart delegation, duplicate detection, and automated triaging, we integrate Cohere's advanced NLP capabilities, ensuring more accurate and efficient similar issue searches.

We are bringing in more agents to delegate some of the work to them. 1. Code agent: This will help you in solving the small code fixes and small features but assigning issues to the agent and giving it instructions on how to solve them. 2. PRD agent: To help in PRD writing for the PM

we'll add more agents for different use-cases going forward

Thank you for your interest! Yes, we have considered building plugins with AI features for Jira. However, due to the limitations we face with control over Jira's UI, we've realized that creating an entirely new interface would be necessary for the kind of seamless interaction we envision.

Our focus isn't just on improving interactions but also on enhancing prioritization of the issues.

Hey Karri, I’m truly sorry for how things have turned out. Our aim was to highlight the importance of design, regardless of the project’s size. We never intended to copy Linear, but rather to consider it as an inspiration for any upcoming tools in this field, emphasizing the need for good design.

Rest assured, we will focus our efforts on these aspects and make sure to rectify the situation.

We aligned considerably and drew inspiration from similar sources, including the same CSS framework style (Shadcn UI) (Opensource). However, we've made several changes based on our users' needs:

1. We determined that the "my-issues" page needed revisions, so we removed it and are currently reimagining how we can improve this feature.

2. We decided to add a company filter and are in the process of implementing it.

3. We altered some icons and other elements because they didn't align with our vision, like the "Issues" icon.

4. We also removed the title feature from the create issue workflow.

5. We are also adding the feedback module.

As you begin using the tool, you'll discover areas we're actively improving based on our ongoing conversations with customers. We've only been working for 2-3 months, but we're continuously striving to enhance the product based on the feedback we receive.

Hey we are working on the documentation and it's almost done and should be there by EOD.

Very curious, in our understanding we thought the companies don't really have the time to spend their engineering bandwidth on project management. How do you think providing such an architecture can help?

We agree to it that JIRA is an elephant. It's also not gonna be an easy journey for us and we are all in for the long journey.

We also have tried initially to build an SSR and get data from the server but when in the process we figured every time making an API call was slowing things down and adding up a lot of latency even if start adding complicated algorithms to the API call caching.

We think indexeddb also evolved in the recent years, but we will definitely keep an eye and keep improving with the available technologies.

thanks a lot. We will add these to our idea board, definitely a lot more work to do and things to build

Thanks a ton. That's a lot of detailing on the use-case. We will definitely put these thoughts as we improvise.

Gotcha thank you :+1

Thank you for your validation. Indeed, we have removed the title from the standard issue creation process. We are also actively working to improve it.

Makes sense. Sure we will start working there more.

It's only been a few months into development, but yeah as our early folks started to use the product and test it out we now started to focus more there.

Indeed, this is a very valid case. Thanks for bringing this up we shall add this to our roadmap.

Our goal is to inspire people to provide comprehensive descriptions of the issues they report, without the worry of making them concise. From our experience, while it's easy to describe things, articulating them can be challenging. Hence, we encourage thorough descriptions first and then we'll help refine them into a clear, well-contextualized title.

Thank you

In order to ensure everything is fast and real-time, we built a sync engine that runs in the background. We also use queues to perform some actions asynchronously. These factors influenced our decision to proceed with a server and scale as necessary.

We were comfortable with this architecture, having used it in our previous apps. This setup also offered us the flexibility to work quickly, as I focused on the frontend while my co-founder handled all backend tasks.

Indeed, our user interface (UI) shares similarities with Linear’s. We, too, are fans of Linear and appreciate its user experience (UX). After speaking with a lot of people, we concluded that it’s top-notch. Consequently, we wanted to give that experience rather than attempting to reinvent the wheel.

Despite drawing inspiration from Linear, we built everything from scratch. Our primary focus is the AI and task prioritization, which consumes most of our effort. We anticipate that our product will evolve and change over time.

Our aim was not to duplicate Linear, but to build a great product, and incorporating elements of Linear’s UX was a part of that process.

Our documentation is a work in progress, with our roadmap soon to be posted there.

We refer to the stages as workflows (To Do, In Progress, In Review, Done, etc.). Currently, we are focusing on the engineering teams and have predefined workflows. However, we plan to launch team-based workflow customization soon.

Regarding initiatives, we are working on a module that will provide a combined view of teams (such as Product, Design, etc.). This initiative module, for example, “Integrations,” will cut across these teams for better tracking.

We apologize for the confusion. You are right our project is under the MIT License, allowing open use but not placing it in the public domain like CC0.

Indeed, I experienced this at Airbyte when Amazon began to charge for implementing Airbyte on their platform. In response, Airbyte took proactive steps such as bolstering the community and modifying the license terms to prevent this.

Additionally, there's a certain inertia involved in applying for all integrations. These, however, will come pre-packaged in our cloud-hosted solutions via OAuth's.

As this is a recurring issue, we plan to engage with the community for ideas on how to effectively address it.

We also plan to build an integration with JIRA where you can still use JIRA and link the issues in Tegon as you slowly migrate to our product. Similar to Github issues which is already live.

We've already transitioned few private beta customers from JIRA using a backend script. Although we haven't addressed all edge cases yet, we anticipate that this script will evolve over time. Once we've covered a sufficient number of scenarios, we plan to integrate this option into the UI.

Yes, we pledge to remain open source.

1. Our design is inspired by the linear UI, which we believe is the best. We didn't want to reinvent this aspect.

2. As for our differentiation, we've been building the system for two months and believe none of the existing systems prioritize AI. We're focusing on deploying AI agents in specific use cases such as:

    1. Task prioritization
    2. Feedback management
    3. Bug resolution

3. Business Model: We already have a beta version of our cloud service live, where we charge on a per-user basis.

Thank you. We chose open source for several reasons:

1. We are building for Engineering Teams: Being in the public domain allows us to collaborate openly with engineering teams and build a better product.

2. Building Trust in AI Agents: Trust is crucial in AI development. By going open source, we demonstrate transparency and accountability, enhancing trust in our AI agents.

3. Enabling Marketplace Development: Our vision includes creating a marketplace for AI agents (Integrating with multiple tools). Open source facilitates community involvement, driving the growth of this marketplace.

4. Community: We've noticed a gap in a vocal community focused on team management and mutual support. Our aim is to create a space where individuals can come together to share knowledge and assist each other effectively.

We love opensource. We have always built in opensource.

How Plaid has provided all needs for Finance products by providing unified API we are bringing that to multiple verticals.

And choosing LLMs as our primary ICP, the solution will evolve more for their needs.

We haven't gotten into finance integrations yet but would love to understand use case more and see what we can do. Happy to discuss more in our community Slack.

Also what kind of SAAS sources are currently ingesting?