# Linear vs GitHub Issues: where should work live?

> **TL;DR** Choose the system of record first. If your work is issues and pull requests in GitHub, keep it there and add a better client such as Gitsu for daily use. If you want a dedicated planning tool with cycles and triage, and the team will move together, choose Linear. Running both, with public GitHub issues synced to a private Linear, works but costs you a sync to maintain.

Linear and GitHub Issues are both good at making work visible. The bigger difference is where the work lives. Linear keeps issues in its own cloud and gives you a fast, opinionated way to plan them. GitHub Issues keeps them in the repository, next to the pull requests and the discussion, and GitHub Projects arranges them into boards and tables.

So choose the system of record first, then the surface you use to work it. This page covers both choices, what Linear's free plan stops at, and what it costs to run the two side by side.

## Which should own the work, Linear or GitHub?

GitHub should own it if your work is mostly issues, pull requests and repository discussion. Linear should own it if you want a planning system with its own teams, cycles and workflow vocabulary, and the whole team will move there together.

| If the work is mostly | Start by evaluating |
| --- | --- |
| GitHub issues, pull requests and repository discussion | GitHub Projects, or a GitHub-native client such as Gitsu |
| Cross-team product planning with its own workspace model | Linear |
| Existing GitHub work that needs a denser daily surface | A client such as Gitsu |

This is a boundary question, not a quality ranking. A second system costs more than the migration. Every day after, someone translates between the issue engineers discuss in GitHub and the item the planning tool shows. A project tool is easier to trust when nobody has to remember which one holds the final version.

## What does Linear do better than GitHub Issues?

Linear is fast, keyboard-first and opinionated, and its planning features are the reason teams choose it. Cycles run your week with automatic rollover and velocity. A triage inbox gives new, unassigned work a queue to land in. Projects and initiatives sit above issues for longer-running work. Pull request activity can move an issue's status on its own. There is a notifications inbox.

Gitsu has none of those today. It can map and filter a Cycle field, but it has no rollover or velocity. Cycles, a triage inbox and a roadmap timeline are listed as coming soon on the Gitsu home page. Notifications, cross-project views and a mobile app are non-goals in Gitsu's product requirements. If your team plans that way, Linear is the better fit and you should say so to yourself before trying anything else.

## What happens when you hit Linear's free-tier limit?

Linear's free plan allows **250 active issues** and **2 teams**, with unlimited members, according to our August 2026 research. At issue 251, creating new issues is blocked until the team archives some or upgrades. Reading is never blocked. Because the cap counts active issues, archiving is a free but recurring way out, which is why many teams stall there rather than decide.

The paid tiers, as of that check, were **$10 per user per month** billed annually ($12 monthly) for Basic and **$16** annually ($18 monthly) for Business, with Enterprise priced on request. Linear raised Basic from $8 and Business from $14 during 2026, so check Linear's pricing page before you quote either.

Teams that hit the wall tend to do one of four things: archive and carry on, pay for Basic, move to another tool such as Plane or ClickUp, or go back to GitHub Issues. The last group chose zero friction on purpose. Every repository already has Issues, with no new login and no new bill. What they give up is a comfortable interface: GitHub's own UI is slower, less dense, and has no real keyboard model.

## What does running public GitHub and private Linear cost you?

Some teams run both: GitHub Issues in public for community bug reports, and Linear in private for internal planning. Linear's GitHub importer and sync support this, and an open-source bridge, SyncLinear, exists to sync a ticket when a label is added, so contributors can take part without a Linear seat.

It works, and it has a running cost. Syncs break. The same bug has two states in two places. Someone has to decide which one is right when they disagree. The fact that a community built and maintains a bridge for this tells you how many teams are paying that cost to get a better triage view on top of public issues.

The alternative is one store. If the work stays in GitHub and the better view is a client that reads and writes GitHub directly, there is nothing to sync. That is the case Gitsu is built for.

## How does Gitsu compare with Linear on daily use?

Gitsu matches Linear on most of what a person does all day, and is missing most of what a team plans with. Checked against Gitsu's requirements:

| What you do | Linear | Gitsu |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Dense list with grouping and counts | Yes | Yes |
| Board with drag to change status | Yes | Yes |
| Nested AND/OR filters across every field type | Not in our research | Yes |
| Saved views and shareable filtered URLs | Yes | Yes |
| Command palette over every write | Not in our research | Yes, `⌘K` |
| Bulk edit of selected items | Yes | Yes |
| Cycles with rollover and velocity | Yes | No |
| Triage inbox | Yes | No (coming soon) |
| Roadmap or timeline | Yes | No (coming soon) |
| Status from pull requests | Yes | No |
| Notifications inbox | Yes | No, a non-goal |
| Where the data lives | Linear's cloud | Your GitHub |

![Gitsu's web app showing a GitHub project as a filtered list, with 34 issues selected and a bulk-edit bar for status, priority, assignee and labels](/webapp.webp)

Every Gitsu item also has an "Open on GitHub" control, so there is no dead end. Anything Gitsu does not do, you can finish on github.com.

## Who should choose Linear, and who should stay on GitHub?

Choose **Linear** if the team wants cycles, triage and a notifications inbox, will adopt the tool together, and is happy for the planning record to live outside the repository.

Stay on **GitHub** if your issues and pull requests are already the shared unit of work, especially for open source where contributors will never get a Linear seat. Add a client for the part GitHub's UI makes slow. Gitsu's web app is free with no card; the paid subscription belongs to one person's account and adds the desktop app and agent features, so nobody else on your team has to change anything.

For the wider field, read the [roundup of GitHub Projects tools](/compare/github-projects-tools), which covers Zenhub and Plane as well. To see exactly what Gitsu does and does not cover against GitHub's own interface, read [Gitsu compared with GitHub's Projects UI](/compare/github-projects).

## Frequently asked questions

### What is the limit on Linear's free plan?

Our August 2026 research found Linear's free plan allows 250 active issues and 2 teams, with unlimited members. Creating the 251st active issue is blocked until the team archives issues or upgrades.

### How much is Linear after the free plan?

Linear Basic was $10 per user per month billed annually, or $12 monthly, and Business was $16 annually or $18 monthly, when we checked in August 2026. Linear raised both prices during 2026, so confirm on Linear's pricing page.

### Can I use Linear and GitHub Issues together?

Yes. Linear has a GitHub importer and sync, and an open-source bridge called SyncLinear syncs a ticket when a label is added. The cost is keeping two systems in agreement: broken syncs, duplicate state and two places to check.

### Is Gitsu a Linear clone for GitHub?

No. Gitsu is a client for GitHub Projects. It matches Linear on list, board, filters and keyboard use, but it has no cycles, triage inbox, roadmap or notifications today, and it stores nothing outside GitHub.