For us the flexibility of this product is nice, we can manage several things within one file and by giving parameters to the deployables. So it is very useful to implement it on several machines in different network segments.
For us the flexibility of this product is nice, we can manage several things within one file and by giving parameters to the deployables. So it is very useful to implement it on several machines in different network segments.
Some deployables have to be built, it is not quite difficult but not every product is supported by one standard. It is open source, so it is easy to build your own portals.
I started to use it last year in a proof of concept.
Some deployables have to be built, it is not quite difficult but not every product is supported by one standard. It is open source, so it is easy to build your own portals.
Stability is fine, performance with a lot of systems, you have to manage the time for refresh with puppet, for xldeploy, the deployments are done after pushing the button. Deployments could be somewhat faster in selecting the environment, but much faster than deploying by hand.
This is our first solution in this case and we are happy with the support of the supplier and with the knowledge on the internet and people whom share products on a blog.
The solution we decided to use is complex; we had several systems which we would implement, so we started with 4 different kind of deployables.
We implemented it in-house and had 3 consultants for several weeks in-house for implementation working together with us.
For us the ROI is not that interesting, the prediction is much more interesting; we are using a lot of environments,11 development and 13 test environments which we would implement with the same settings to be predictable for the implementation of projects.
We had looked for several other solutions but for unix/linux environments which we are using this product has more opportunities as landesk or something.