>most project management software a) takes a lot of time to configure
Every project management software will have some reasonable defaults that can get you started in no time.
The problem is that every company (and certainly any company with more than a handful of employees), at some point, will want to adjust the tool to their use case and that's where the complexity comes in. If you can't adjust things like statuses and workflows, then you'll have issues with adoption.
All the best, this is an incredibly crowded and competitive scene.
This. This is what we think about, constantly. How do we maintain the low to zero config teams ask for flexibility. We are a few apple engineers on the founding team (I'm not), and they really want to follow the approach set by Mac OS. Overall, Tara won't be for everyone, but it's a fine line between balancing the intuitive simple design and use case adjustments/workflows. Could be considered a matrix with several trade-offs.
Every project management software will have some reasonable defaults that can get you started in no time.
The problem is that every company (and certainly any company with more than a handful of employees), at some point, will want to adjust the tool to their use case and that's where the complexity comes in. If you can't adjust things like statuses and workflows, then you'll have issues with adoption.
All the best, this is an incredibly crowded and competitive scene.