Overview
Linear has great UX for ticket workflows. But it still expects humans to update status, and software development is not a linear queue. The friction shows up the moment a 5-20 person team ships frontend, backend, and QA in parallel. "Blocked" lives in Slack instead of on the plan.
Ravel is built for that reality: parallel streams, real blockers, and progress that follows what actually shipped. Describe the goal, get an executable map, and downstream work stays locked until upstream work finishes. No more hoping everyone remembered to move their ticket.
A real-world example
Imagine a 10-person team shipping a payments feature. Backend API, frontend UI, security review, and documentation all need to finish before QA can start. In Linear, the eng lead chases blockers in Slack and finds out Thursday that the API was not actually done. The ticket just said Done.
In Ravel, the API task stays linked to what ships. When the PR merges, the map advances, unlocks the frontend and security tracks, and notifies the owners. No status theater pass required. The eng lead sees the map shift, not a stale column.
How they compare
| Capability | Ravel | Linear |
|---|---|---|
| Turn a brief into sequenced work | Built-in, goal to graph in minutes | Manual issue breakdown only |
| See blockers & critical path | Native DAG with live critical path | Blocking links on a sorted queue, no critical path |
| Flat workspace pricing | $19/mo, whole team included | Per-seat, cost scales with headcount |
| Progress tied to shipped work | Webhook-native, merges feed completion | Status automation from PRs, no scope check |
| Auto task unlock on completion | Automatic when upstream work completes | Manual, dependents stay blocked until someone acts |
| Department / multi-team structure | Departments built at plan time | Teams and projects, structure added by hand |
| AI detects completion & advances status | Yes, PR, upload, link, or custom rules | No, human marks Done on every issue |
| Built for non-linear parallel work | Native DAG, parallel tracks first-class | Linear backlog, sequential queue UX |
| Multi-type completion (code, upload, link) | Per-task rules evaluated by AI | Single workflow, manual status changes |
| Works without installing desktop software | Browser + email notifications | Desktop app recommended for full workflow |
| Onboarding cost for new members | Open a link, no app install | Learn cycles, states, and desktop shortcuts |
Dig deeper Pricing, planning, GitHub, and more
Progress without status theater
In Linear, completion is a human action. Someone marks an issue done or drags it to a finished state. That works fine for a handful of tasks. It breaks when dozens finish through different proof: merged PRs, uploaded specs, vendor links, or review sign-off.
Ravel evaluates progress against each task completion rules. GitHub activity for code-backed work. Uploads for files. Links for external deliverables. When work meets the bar, Ravel marks it complete and pushes the graph forward: dependents unlock, owners get notified, and the next wave starts without a manual status pass.
Linear AI helps write ticket descriptions and triage. Ravel AI participates in execution: detecting completion and keeping non-linear work flowing.
Dependencies & critical path
Linear supports blocking links. But the main experience remains a sorted list. Work is presented as "next up," even when the real constraint is a dependency chain across teams. There is no live critical path and no automatic unlock when blockers clear.
Ravel treats the DAG as the product: parallel tracks stay visible, blocked work stays blocked, and downstream tasks unlock when upstream work finishes. You see why the release is stuck, not just which ticket happens to be at the top of a queue.
The difference shows up mid-sprint. A platform task slips and three feature tracks should have been idle days ago. Linear shows you tickets. Ravel shows you the broken chain.
Planning workflow
Linear works well with Cycles when scope is small and dependencies are simple. Multi-team releases still require manual breakdown, labels, and project scopes to fake parallel work.
Ravel starts from intent. Describe the goal in natural language and get departments, tasks, and dependencies proposed in minutes. The plan reflects non-linear structure from the start: who runs in parallel, what must finish first, what unlocks next. No retrofitting blockers onto a queue after kickoff.
Pricing
Linear charges per user. Standard is $10 per user per month. Business is $16. For a 12-person team, that is $120 to $192 per month. Ravel is $19 for the whole workspace. No per-seat math.
Both let you try before committing. Ravel includes a 14-day free trial. No credit card required.
GitHub & integrations
Linear connects to GitHub and can move issue status when PRs open or merge. Status follows PR linkage, which works well when a task maps to one PR. It does not evaluate whether the work actually matches the task scope, and there is no automatic unlock of downstream work when a task completes.
Ravel connects to GitHub natively. Commits and pull requests feed progress. AI evaluates whether the work matches the task scope. Non-code tasks use uploads, links, or other per-task rules. Each has its own proof of completion, assessed automatically. When a task finishes, the graph advances and dependents unlock.
Adoption & learning curve
Linear has a web app and desktop clients (Mac, Windows). The best experience uses keyboard shortcuts and native navigation that take a few days to learn. Every teammate needs to learn the issue states, cycles, and triage habits before the tool feels natural.
Ravel is browser-first. Open a link, sign in, and work on the graph. No download for engineering, design, QA, or stakeholders. Task updates, unlock notifications, and risk alerts arrive by email when people are not in the app. Contributors stay in the loop without another desktop client or a crash course in issue taxonomy.
For contractors and cross-functional teammates who touch the sprint briefly, that difference matters. Linear asks them to adopt a tool. Ravel asks them to complete a task.
FAQ
- Why not just add blockers in Linear?
- Blockers on a sorted list still present work as linear. There is no automatic unlock, no critical path, and no proof that "Done" means done. Ravel models parallel departments and completion rules as the default.
- How does Ravel know a task is complete without me clicking Done?
- Each task has a completion method. PRs and commits for code. File uploads for documents. Links for external deliverables. Custom rules for anything else. AI evaluates progress against the assigned method and unlocks downstream tasks when the bar is met.
- Do we need to install anything to use Ravel?
- No. Ravel runs in the browser. Team members get email notifications and open task links without a desktop client. Design, QA, and contractors can participate without installing anything.
- Does Linear require a desktop app?
- Linear has a capable web app, but the best experience uses the native desktop client. Ravel is browser-first so the whole workspace can participate without extra software.
- When should we stay on Linear?
- If your work is mostly one-person sequential triage with almost no cross-team dependencies, Linear is a strong fit. If team check-ins are spent untangling blockers and chasing stale statuses, that is the gap Ravel targets.
- How does pricing compare?
- Linear charges per user. Standard is $10 per user per month. Business is $16. Ravel is $19 per month for the entire workspace regardless of team size.
Other comparisons
Try Ravel free for 14 days
If your team check-ins sound like "who is blocked on what", Ravel is worth 14 days. No install, no credit card.
Start free trial