We performed a comparison between ChangeMan ZMF and Endevor based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We audit once a year for our ChangeMan access, accurate financial programs, and all of that. Auditors really love ChangeMan for how easy it is to get through and how tight the security is on it. Our internal auditors, external auditors, and SOX editors love this solution. We're in the healthcare business, so HIPAA regulations and all such things are a big deal, and this makes all that really simple."
"Scalability is great. It has absolutely met every need for us so far. We do have some concurrent development paths and we're able to flexibly assign variables. At the same time, our skeletons assemble where we want them to, so the scalability is very good."
"It's the audit-level tracking. If something has gone wrong I can go back and figure out what happened, who did it."
"The most valuable feature of Endevor is the software controller."
"The developers can very easily see what has changed on a particular piece of source code or a program, and others can look at that as well so they can coordinate their changes. It makes it much easier to promote a piece of code up to production."
"Stability has been really good. I have actually never had to open an issue or report an issue since I have been running it."
"The most valuable features are stability and ease of use."
"We can make it do pretty much whatever we want, depending on just how complicated we want it to be, as it is pretty flexible."
"In the last year or so, we had a need to start using a CICS web services, and mesh them in with some distributed functions on an enterprise service bus. We put the web services into Endevor and we manage that way now."
"It puts all our source in one product. We know where to go to gather all our source code and which source is associated with which executable. It's a one-stop-shop, one place to go for everything."
"I would like to see them enable parallel development for online. It's available now for batch stuff on the mainframe. Jenkins, IBM, and Rocket all supposedly already have safe and workable version of Git for the mainframe. With that in mind, we need to know where our feature is."
"As such, there's nothing wrong with the product. It is great, but there are small things that can be better to make it much more friendly. The way you navigate through fields can be improved. If I'm going to stage a component over something that exists and that I've created in another library, and I want to pull it in and write it over what I've got there in my package, I've got to type in that data set name every time. That can be aggravating. It is not a big deal. The way things are sorted can also be improved. If you're doing a delete of a bunch of components, you can't sort those out by type or anything. Some things are just standard, and you can't look at them in a way that would be helpful."
"I would like to have better integration with other products."
"Needs more audit capability when it comes to changes to settings that are made by administrators, as many of these are done through the panels and are therefore not logged as an action against a configuration item."
"The initial setup can be less complex and has room for improvement."
"The scalability of Endevor could improve."
"Learning the tool for the first time was extremely difficult, and it could be because of all the other processes we had around it. But knowing you can do these things in batch, you can do things in the foreground or online mode, and then these, you have to have a package for. There are these rules, and some of the concepts inside the tool are not clear, like what is the CCID? Why do I have to have one? What is that? And how is it used? As a developer, it's not important to me - I don't know what a CCID is, and I don't care - but apparently it's important to someone."
"The main challenges are its limited interface and the complexity of the customization."
"Endevor can improve parallel development."
"One feature of Endevor is its Backout feature. If there is a problem, it can back out the executables. The only problem with that is that it will not back out the source in Endevor. For example, you can do a back out and it will back out the executable to the previous version, but it doesn't back out the source version in Endevor. It would make it much better if when you did a back out of Endevor, it would back out both the source and the executable and keep them in sync."
Earn 20 points
ChangeMan ZMF is ranked 6th in Software Configuration Management while Endevor is ranked 1st in Software Configuration Management with 45 reviews. ChangeMan ZMF is rated 7.6, while Endevor is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of ChangeMan ZMF writes "Very flexible with Johnny-on-the-spot tech support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Endevor writes "A highly stable tool for managing mainframe software development projects that require significant expertise". ChangeMan ZMF is most compared with BMC Compuware ISPW, whereas Endevor is most compared with BMC Compuware ISPW, CA Harvest Software Change Manager, IBM Rational ClearCase and IBM Engineering Workflow Management. See our ChangeMan ZMF vs. Endevor report.
See our list of best Software Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Software Configuration Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.