We performed a comparison between CA Harvest Software Change Manager and Endevor 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."Using this solution, we were able to implement a full process for all of our lifecycles."
"The ability to give our teams functionality from a control perspective, allowing them to decide how they want to implement the tool, is valuable."
"It provides secure, controlled access to source management."
"Stability has been really good. I have actually never had to open an issue or report an issue since I have been running it."
"The source integrity is the most valuable feature."
"It standardizes the processing of all the development. Everything gets produced in a constant and consistent manner."
"The tools are specifically designed for mainframe environments, providing features tailored to the unique requirements of the systems, ensuring there are no mistakes."
"It was an easy install. Since it was all set up, it pretty much runs itself now."
"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."
"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."
"Technical support for this solution is very good, although they can still use improvement in some regards."
"Password complexity is not enforced by the tool."
"Security features can be improved."
"The initial setup can be less complex and has room for improvement."
"If I had to comment on an area of improvement or something new in the next or future version, I would like to see AI-assisted coding and impact analysis for mainframes."
"They need to ditch the Eclipse plugin and just make the development environment for Z the standard Eclipse interface."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The scalability of Endevor could improve."
"Sometimes finding errors and output can be difficult because it spits out so many messages that it is hard to figure out which ones are the ones you need to look at and what flow did it actually take through the processor."
More CA Harvest Software Change Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
CA Harvest Software Change Manager is ranked 8th in Software Configuration Management while Endevor is ranked 1st in Software Configuration Management with 45 reviews. CA Harvest Software Change Manager is rated 7.2, while Endevor is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of CA Harvest Software Change Manager writes "Powerful UDP functionality with a user-friendly interface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Endevor writes "A highly stable tool for managing mainframe software development projects that require significant expertise". CA Harvest Software Change Manager is most compared with , whereas Endevor is most compared with BMC Compuware ISPW, OpenText ChangeMan ZMF, IBM Rational ClearCase and IBM Engineering Workflow Management. See our CA Harvest Software Change Manager vs. Endevor 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.