The solutions that I previously used were in a distributed environment.

What we were using before was actually a CA product, a product called Panvalet, but that was like a prior generation of product, and Endevor is the newer type of product, so we went over to Endevor back in the '90s.

We were using a different solution. When I moved to the company, I realized that it was time to get on board with cutting edge technology and get out of the arcade toy world.

Quite a few years ago we had homegrown software configuration management system. It was very, very difficult to maintain. We converted over to Endevor years and years ago, actually back in the 90s. We've been able to make changes to Endevor over the years to be able to keep up with the new technologies being released out in the environment. We're pretty much current right now. We don't really have any open requirements from our customers. We're able to get the new technologies brought into Endevor very cleanly. It's really open ended, so it can plug things in, take things out

This solution has been in place for a long time, longer than I've been around.

Back in the day, it was just hard to manage multiple code streams; concurrent development I guess is what it was really. We needed to be able to manage that in a rational manner and automate it, so that's really why Endevor was picked. Also, CA was the market leader and they had the pretty much best product, after we went through all the due diligence.

We used to use a homegrown, user-friendly, in-house program but Endevor was an industry standard. We didn't use a competing product because this in-house program wasn't a product.

I've used other products in the past, but they weren't as feature-rich as Endevor. They didn't have all the advantages that Endevor has for source code management. I haven't found a product yet that could compete with Endevor, as far as source code management is concerned.

There was nothing else on the market and we had to start managing our mainframe applications. This was the best way to do it.

Our previous solution was an in-house developed system. The switch to Endevor was made because the in-house developed system was cumbersome to use and was lacking accountability.

We have not used other solutions similar to Endevor.

Endevor has always been our source code. The support they provide for their products is bar none: excellent. If we have any problems with the product, CA support is always there for us. They're always talking to us about enhancing their products as well.

I think we had a product that was being discontinued, and we were looking for a product to be able to handle the volume of source we had. We also wanted to be able to easily transition to the new product, one that would require minimal training.

I'm not sure because I didn't select CA as a vendor. I guess price, realistically, has a lot to do with the end solution of what you're actually choosing. Features and stability should be on the list, but realistically, price has to be in there as well.

Since I have been there, we did not have anything before that, but it makes it so it is not chaos, where anybody can go in anytime. 

We had our own home grown solution that required constant maintenance and patching.

I use SCLM as well.

We did not use any other solutions, but we considered Endevor's most significant competitor at the time ISPW.

We had Changeman on one of our mainframes. We migrated to Endevor for the cost savings and also for consistency in our SCM. Endevor was our choice between the two.

It's been so long that I don't know what the previous solution was, but the switch was because we were trying to get it all consolidated, because we were in multiple places.

We did not previously use a different solution.

Endevor has been in place as long as I have worked in my current role.