IBM Rational DOORS Other Solutions Considered

Michael W. Knop
Requirements Engineer at Visteon Corporation
I would like to use this space to give an opinion on migrating from DOORS to DNG. I have been the sole person in charge of and doing the migration and I have provided input on other migrations. I understand the desire for, and have in the past strongly advocated, the use of an integrated tool chain. IBM Jazz products like RQM, RTC, DNG, etc. provide, in theory, the holy grail: planning, defect/change management, requirements, and tests, all linking together. However... Focusing just on DNG, it is in my experience a terrible product. Some features work really well. But others baffle me in their ineptitude, and these are legion. Almost everyday I run into an issue that makes me curse it under my breath. People who have used DOORS to it's fullest extent, with a high-level of DXL customization, will hate DNG. One of the hardest parts of migration is convincing users DNG is better. I have given up on that because I am now of the opinion that DOORS is better than DNG. Why? DOORS, at its heart, is not a requirements management tool. It is a highly extensible object linking system. That extensible-ness is absolutely key to making the product work for you. I have come to the conclusion that if you are considering migrating from DOORS to DNG... DON'T! Instead of spending 100's to 1000's of hours doing migrations, invest those hours in a DXL programmer to make DOORS do what it isn't doing for you now. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Atlassian, Jama and others in Application Requirements Management. Updated: September 2019.
371,917 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Sign Up with Email