We used Pivotal Tracker for a long time (18+ months) on several large, internal projects and suffered from those same limitations. However, we kept using it bec

We used Pivotal Tracker for a long time (18+ months) on several large, internal projects and suffered from those same limitations. However, we kept using it because it has a very quick UX that updates concurrently with other users. However as our team grew and we trained people on using Pivotal I was reminded of how much I hated the limitations of Tracker and how it's so hard to focus on a single story. It's just a touch too opinionated. From a management perspective it was also very hard to see what was going on across a large project with many sub-modules. I went through every "web hook" integration in Github and tried every single project management tool, including JIRA. JIRA was so bad (slow and complicated) it was almost comical. We ended up using Planbox, which is still story-oriented but solves pretty much every complaint I ever had about Tracker. The UX is extremely fast, handles concurrent users, supports per-task assignment, time estimation and tracking, and has single-story views that are much larger and easier to work with. One of our devs also wrote up a git/CLI integration (https://github.com/ardell/git-planbox https://github.com/ardell/git-planbox) that implements our branch naming scheme and provides a CLI interface to Planbox so that daily workflow can be done nearly entirely from the CLI. If you want it, he had also done a git/pivotal integration in the same vein (https://github.com/ardell/Git-Pivotal https://github.com/ardell/Git-Pivotal).