We performed a comparison between Endevor, IBM Rational ClearCase, and OpenText ChangeMan ZMF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, BMC, Microsoft and others in Software Configuration Management."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."
"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."
"It can be very flexible, as far as how you use it. You can make it do nearly anything, but in really clever ways. It is very versatile."
"We backup people's source code for them."
"Endevor is easy to use."
"The flexibility, because I know a lot of the competition pigeonholes you into definitions and character limitations, and Endevor is wide open."
"It standardizes the processing of all the development. Everything gets produced in a constant and consistent manner."
"The source integrity is the most valuable feature."
"IBM Rational ClearCase is a stable solution. I have not had any difficulty with reliability."
"ClearCase integrates well with other engineering tools and frameworks such as the Eclipse environment."
"The tool had features similar to Git for version control. It offered branching and merging capabilities, providing better control over code management. Integration was possible with other tools, including some change management tools. The overall process was normal."
"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."
"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."
"They need to ditch the Eclipse plugin and just make the development environment for Z the standard Eclipse interface."
"I would like to have better integration with other products."
"Interfacing with some change control products that are not CA's, it's a little glitchy on the approvals of changes. It requires special needs for the users for approvals."
"The initial setup can be less complex and has room for improvement."
"The main challenges are its limited interface and the complexity of the customization."
"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."
"It is difficult to find file programs and use a different tool for the setup as the compilation process is all locked up."
"The protection needs to be improved."
"The solution's UI is slow compared to other tools. It is an old tool."
"I have found it very difficult to understand many functionalities in IBM Rational ClearCase. We have had many problems and it is not user-friendly."
"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