We performed a comparison between Endevor, IBM Engineering Workflow Management, 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."It was an easy install. Since it was all set up, it pretty much runs itself now."
"It's the audit-level tracking. If something has gone wrong I can go back and figure out what happened, who did it."
"The tools are specifically designed for mainframe environments, providing features tailored to the unique requirements of the systems, ensuring there are no mistakes."
"We backup people's source code for them."
"Stability has been really good. I have actually never had to open an issue or report an issue since I have been running it."
"We have used it for years and never had any real issues with it."
"The most valuable features are stability and ease of use."
"The approach of writing a single set of Endevor processors to work across multiple instances of the application (separate systems) made the processors fairly complex, but once you understand them, they are so powerful."
"All of the features work together to provide a powerful holistic solution - from the dashboard all the way through to security."
"Traceability reporting is inbuilt and includes all your requirements."
"Work distribution among team members and accountability for completion with a clearer picture."
"Good for managing stories, sprints, hydration and releases."
"We can track the status of test cases (passed or saved) in a single view. Based on releases and other attributes, we generate various reports and extract metrics from the data."
"Agile templates give us a standard methodology for every Agile project. Also, the ability to create our own object types and linkages to features/epics allows us to enhance the verification of feature readiness."
"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."
"The solution is very expensive."
"The initial setup can be less complex and has room for improvement."
"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."
"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."
"The main challenges are its limited interface and the complexity of the customization."
"There should be better integration between CA Endevor Software Change Manager and Zowe."
"It is difficult to find file programs and use a different tool for the setup as the compilation process is all locked up."
"Some administrative tasks are difficult to perform. These could be simplified."
"The solution is very heavily vendor dependent."
"Teams need clearer pictures of resource availability in charts and dashboards along with plans."
"Lacks ability to customize and reporting can be slow."
"We have encountered issues with stability. We have seen where the entire system kind of goes for a toss when certain people use certain types of queries, which are very costly. Then the system kind of slows down a bit, and we have to monitor it."
"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."
More IBM Engineering Workflow Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
