You coordinate a retail rollout with store managers filing requests as issues, developers linking fixes in pull requests, and executives wanting one board view of status. Your repo has 300 open items and no consistent tracking. Which GitHub capability should you use first to track and capture work across issues, pull requests, and projects?

The correct workflow succeeds because it directly unifies the three required layers: store requests become trackable issues that provide consistent metadata and search across 300 items, linked pull requests with closing keywords create automatic traceability from problem to fix, and a Projects board aggregates both into the single executive view for triage and status. The milestone variant is professionally sound for release deadlines and preserves issues and linked pull requests, yet it fails the board-view requirement because milestones list progress by due date without customizable columns, grouping, and workflow automation. The separate-pull-request variant also centralizes issues and uses a Projects board correctly, yet it breaks the linkage concept by keeping review decoupled, so merges cannot auto-close issues or surface live status. The discussion-based variant correctly uses linked pull requests and a Projects board, yet it mistakes the capture layer because discussions support open-ended conversation rather than assignable, closable work items needed for consistent tracking. An exam caveat is that milestones and projects often appear together, so focus on the verb in the stem: deadline tracking points to milestones while board visualization points to projects. As a practical check, confirm every request exists as an issue, each fix shows a linked pull request that will close it, and the board reflects movement without manual email or spreadsheet updates.