DeliverySheet vs Jira and Linear

Two different jobs

A ticket tracker's job starts once someone has decided the work is happening. It is very good at that job: assignment, status, boards, cycle time, everything downstream of a yes.

The decision that produced the yes happens somewhere else — usually in a meeting, a deck and a Slack thread, and usually without anyone establishing the six things a commitment needs: the problem as distinct from someone's preferred solution, the outcome, a named owner, a capacity figure the delivering team agreed to, the dependencies, and the open questions written down as unknowns. That is the layer DeliverySheet governs, and it is where most missed dates are actually decided.

What that looks like in practice

• A demand can fail to become a commitment. A ticket queue has no state for "understood but not ready"; a governance layer does, and says precisely what is missing.
• "No known risks" is a first-class answer, distinct from "nobody looked" — so clean work stops generating fictional risk registers.
• Committing early is allowed and recorded. Four fields: why now, what is missing, who accepts, what would change it. Countable at quarter end.
• Capacity is in FTE-months, agreed per team, so it survives a budget conversation instead of stopping at the team boundary.

Where the boundary is today

Being straight about it: full native task management is the long-term direction, not the current promise. Component → work package → task decomposition exists in the product, but it is deliberately not the front door, and DeliverySheet does not yet replace Jira or Linear for day-to-day execution. If that is what you need, you need them.

What it replaces is the part that currently lives nowhere: the decision, its evidence, and the record of what you promised and why.