I use Github Projects. Which I would not particularly recommend. But managing a list of tasks and bugs isn't really rocket science. And I have used project mana

I use Github Projects. Which I would not particularly recommend. But managing a list of tasks and bugs isn't really rocket science. And I have used project management solutions that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars that are infinitely worse. Github Projects are sufficiently minimally functional, even if strangely broken and unloved. There are a lot of things that you would think would be automated. Things like rolling over to a new sprint with a couple of clicks, instead of having to manually revise all the queries on your scrum board. But you can do what you want to do. And maybe that's better than having to live with the inflexibility of somebody else's idea of what process should be. In some ways, minimality might be an advantage. A heart, this is a list management problem. And not a very complicated one. And Github Projects do lists perfectly well. The one thing that recommends Github Projects over a paper-based or card-based task list is that it does provide public visibility to users as to how their bug reports and feature requests are being dealt with. And it's incredibly easy to take something brought up in a discussion board, and flip it over to a bug report, or development task (deferred or active). Usual scrum rules apply. All bugs are fixed before working on new tasks. And tasks move to done status only when they are fully and completely done. You need lists. I like sprint structure on top of tasks, because they provide a useful punctuation point for interim updates and continuous releases.