Scrumban.
Kanban's continuous flow with Scrum's time-boxed sprints. For a solo founder or a small team, it is the shortest cadence that still forces shipping.
What Scrumban actually is
Scrumban keeps the parts of Kanban and Scrum that pull their weight, and drops the rest. From Kanban, it takes the visual board, the column-based workflow, and work-in-progress limits — the things that make flow legible. From Scrum, it takes the time-boxed sprint — the thing that turns a backlog into a plan.
What it skips: daily standups, sprint grooming meetings, story-point ceremonies, retrospectives-as-ritual. Those work for ten engineers in a tuned org; they do not work for one founder trying to ship on a Saturday.
Why Weft picks Scrumban
Weft exists because most task managers are shaped for one of two extremes: either a lone-todo app (infinite list, no cadence) or a fifty-person Agile suite (process overhead for a founder of one). Scrumban sits precisely in the middle — enough structure to force a weekly or bi-weekly ship, not so much that you spend the ship-day administering it.
How Weft implements it
- Four default columns: Backlog, Todo, Doing, Done. You can add WIP limits per column.
- One active sprint at a time. Sprints are optional — skip them if pure Kanban fits.
- Tasks have priority, estimate, due date, and an optional sprint attachment. No epics, no workflows, no custom fields.
- Cycle time starts when a task moves into a column with
semantic="doing"and ends in"done". The numbers come out of honest use, not story-point arithmetic.
When Scrumban is not the right method
- You run multiple concurrent Scrum teams. Program-level reporting, shared velocity, cross-team dependencies — full Scrum in Jira earns its keep.
- You do pure support / continuous ops. No sprint cadence needed — pure Kanban or a ticketing system fits better.
- You need Gantt charts and timelines. Scrumban is sprint-focused, not dependency-graph-focused.