Your issues stay in Linear, with the reasons for them beside them.
Linear is the best place to plan and track issues. But the reasons behind an issue, the conversation about it, the customer who asked for it and the code that closes it live elsewhere. Current brings them into the project and keeps Linear in sync.
Where Current is different
- The why next to the what
- Customer signals, meeting decisions and the team’s chat sit in the same project as its Linear issues, so the context behind a ticket is one glance away.
- Turn talk into issues
- Action items from a meeting, a customer quote or a thread become Linear issues in a click, linked back to where they came from.
- Agents that close the loop
- Hand an issue to an agent. It codes on its own branch, opens the PR, and the project moves when it merges.
Where Linear is good
- Fast, keyboard-first issue tracking that engineers actually like.
- Cycles, projects and roadmaps with a clean model.
- A strong API and integrations.
Together
Current is built to run with Linear. Link a project and its phase follows the Linear project status, its documents become pages synced both ways, and your issues in progress show as what you’re working on.
| Linear | ||
|---|---|---|
| Team chat, organised by project | Yes | No Comments on issues |
| Linked PRs, issues and docs, live in the project | Yes GitHub, Linear, Notion | Partly Issues; PRs via GitHub |
| Decisions as their own record, with a source | Yes | No |
| Meeting notes into decisions and issues | Yes | No |
| Customer signals routed to the right project | Yes Intercom, Gong | Partly Customer requests |
| Coding agents on their own branch | Yes Sandboxed worktrees | Partly Delegates to agents |
| Live previews with comments pinned to elements | Yes | No |
| One timeline across every tool | Yes | Partly Issue history |
| Bring your own AI: Claude Code, Codex, Gemini, OpenCode | Yes | No |