I am not convinced by this idea. Our general guideline says to not include metrics that distract from the central Scrum metrics: Sprint Burndown and Velocity.

Now, introducing such an identification of Tasks within the Sprint Burndown would also be a serious challenge, UI wise.

What I cannot see is the actual gain from such a feature (that outweights the disadvantages in cluttering the UI and investing the implementation effort).

The Whiteboard already indicates how much of a Story is already done (or still needs to be done). Also, we should take into account that the Team has commited to complete all the Stories (not many or some of them), and should ideally do so from top to bottom (to avoid the case that Stories are completed in an order that contradicts their priority).

Our current situation: Developing decentralized, since I am on the other side of the world. I come home and check kunagi. What I see is that work has been done. Good. What I don't see in many cases is _where_ the work has been done. Especially when there's only time logged but no task completed, which is a serious indicator that problems occurred.

Alternative idea: make logging time an entry on the journal?

I am afraid this would spam the journal too much. If tasks are burned, but not closed these should be in the "Claimed Tasks" column. Do you realy have that much of them?