We performed a comparison between Endevor and OpenText ChangeMan ZMF 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."Any question that an auditor has about our processes and approvals is all stored in Endevor."
"It offers security and audit of changes in information assets (software)."
"Being able to compare versions is helpful."
"Endevor is easy to use."
"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."
"Stability has been really good. I have actually never had to open an issue or report an issue since I have been running it."
"They've got plug-ins now to run it through Eclipse, they've got a lot of APIs, they handle UNIX files. I can't really think of any serious lack that they haven't addressed."
"The management and information CA Endevor Software Change Manager provides is very useful"
"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."
"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."
"The solution is very expensive."
"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."
"It is still kind of behind the times. It needs to catch up with all the millennials that want a distributed look and feel."
"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."
"There are a lot of screens in it. The process for moving out my other solutions, it could be more convenient. There are a lot of steps to go through and a lot of screens to go through to get it accomplished."
"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 scalability of Endevor could improve."
"They need to ditch the Eclipse plugin and just make the development environment for Z the standard Eclipse interface."
"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 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."
Earn 20 points
Endevor is ranked 1st in Software Configuration Management with 45 reviews while OpenText ChangeMan ZMF is ranked 5th in Software Configuration Management. Endevor is rated 8.8, while OpenText ChangeMan ZMF is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Endevor writes "A highly stable tool for managing mainframe software development projects that require significant expertise". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ChangeMan ZMF writes "Very flexible with Johnny-on-the-spot tech support". Endevor is most compared with BMC Compuware ISPW, CA Harvest Software Change Manager, IBM Rational ClearCase and IBM Engineering Workflow Management, whereas OpenText ChangeMan ZMF is most compared with BMC Compuware ISPW. See our Endevor vs. OpenText ChangeMan ZMF 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.
