Skip to main content
Waterline supports GitHub Issues as an alternative to Jira for teams that track work directly in their repository. Because your issues and code live in the same place, enabling this integration requires no additional sign-in — Waterline reuses the GitHub connection you already have.

​
Enable GitHub Issues

1

Connect GitHub first

GitHub Issues requires an active GitHub repository connection. If you haven’t done that yet, see Connect GitHub.
2

Open the integration settings

Go to Settings → Integrations → GitHub Issues.
3

Turn it on

Toggle Enable GitHub Issues on. That’s it — GitHub Issues is now available as a ticket source when you run an analysis.

​
Analyzing a GitHub issue

Go to Analyze, select GitHub Issues as the source, and enter an issue number: 
42
Waterline fetches the issue from your connected repository, extracts acceptance criteria from the issue body, and runs the same analysis pipeline as Jira: semantic code search, LLM relevance scoring, criterion-to-code mapping, and a final progress score.

​
How it differs from Jira

JiraGitHub Issues
AuthSeparate OAuth (Atlassian)Reuses your GitHub OAuth connection
Ticket identifierPROJ-123Issue number (e.g., 42)
Acceptance criteria sourceDescription or custom fieldIssue body (Markdown)
Sub-tasksSupportedPartially, via linked issues
Custom fieldsYesLabels and milestones only
GitHub Issues tends to have less structured acceptance criteria than Jira. Waterline’s LLM handles free-form Markdown well — task lists, bullet points, and prose descriptions all produce useful criteria.

​
Tips for better results

Use task lists in your issue body (- [ ] user can log in). Waterline treats each checklist item as a candidate acceptance criterion, which produces the most precise mapping to code.
  • Be specific. Vague criteria like “it should work” produce low-confidence scores. Criteria like “password reset email is sent within 30 seconds” give the LLM a concrete signal to match against code.
  • Avoid noise in the issue body. Long comment threads or unrelated discussion don’t affect analysis — Waterline reads the issue body, not the comments — but keeping the body focused on requirements helps.
  • Link merged PRs to the issue. Waterline doesn’t require PR links, but they provide useful context when you’re reviewing evidence for a criterion.