Endevor Reviews

We use it for version control in the mainframe area.

It's been great. To be honest, we use GitHub for enterprise for the distributed world, and we use SCM for the mainframe world. So far, I've looked around as well. I've not seen a computer that's close to Endevor in terms of performance, scalability and capability.

On a day to day basis, it's all about managing my operations without any downtime. The tool has done a good job of want I want it to do, and it's a very stable tool. I think it's doing a good job.

• Automated build
• Quick Edit option
• Utilities for continuous integration

I think the main focus should be the continuous delivery aspects. How can I have a single view of the distributed core and the mainframe core, coming together in one wholesome, holistic experience?

Stability is great. Since it's running on the mainframe I think CA has done a really good job of keeping the availability at more than "three nines." As well, whenever there is any support issue I think that CA is really good, and it gets resolved within 24 hours.

Regarding scalability, we started off when we were very, very small. We've been using it for more than seven or eight years, and the mainframe size has increased but Endevor has done a good job of keeping up with it.

For the straightforward questions I think that they do a good job of getting back within 24 hours. For the tricky ones, whenever it comes to upgrades or things like that, they definitely take 48 to 72 hours. The response time is slower, but the good thing is they come back with the right answers, and that's what is important.

I started managing about it four years back and we've gone through many upgrades and renewals, but I was not part of the initial set up.

If you're upgrading more than one version, there is a difference. Typically, if you upgrade frequently, it's better. But if you're doing multiple jumps then I would say getting CA's support would be helpful, as the underlying architecture could have changed and things could go south. So it is important to involve CA support or at least to have them review the plan.

I give it an eight out of 10, and the reason I am cutting the two points is that I want it to be a little more lightweight in terms of continuous delivery.

If you're looking for a version control system for mainframe, I don't think you should even have a second thought of not trying at least trying out Endevor. I'm sure you won't be disappointed. At the same time, it has all the capabilities that are required to take your company into the continuous delivery ecosystem. That's why I think you should definitely give it a shot.

It is easy to use, easy to learn, and easy to maintain; also the automation.

We primarily benefit in terms of the availability and reliability of our software during the development lifecycle.

There are a lot of areas: using it cross-platform; across a diverse set of application portfolios, including legacy systems, as well as open systems; both waterfall and Agile development. I'm not sure I can say there's one particular focus. We can have more features.

We find the solution to be very stable. There are no major issues or problems that I'm aware of.

We run a very large enterprise, so it scales very well for us.

We get very good and timely responses from support. It is very good.

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

I'm not sure I can say which vendors were on the short list, but I can tell you that decisions are made primarily from the standpoint of cost effectiveness for the business, as well as the product features and functions. It must be able to meet the minimum requirements as well as be cost effective. The overall efficiency and effectiveness is there; and the responsiveness is there.

When I choose a vendor, I look at stability, reliability, responsiveness, and efficiency.

Do your homework. Talk to customers. Don't just rely on market research. Find what other people's experiences have been. It's very valuable.

Valuable features of Endevor include the ability to see all code modifications and a smooth transition into production.

Our organization now has standardized change management processes for implementation into production. With our old process, any number of people could have put code into production, but now Endevor is the only user who can touch production.

The parts of Endevor which we use do not need improving as they work very well.

Endevor offers many flexible processing options, but our organization does not use the product’s capabilities to their fullest potential. The processing options in our shop work quite well and are easy to understand.

Conversion to Endevor began about nine years ago.

I have not encountered any stability issues. Each version upgrade of Endevor has been stable.

As Endevor moves through the stages toward production, disk space can become an issue. PDSE structures resolve space issues.

Endevor technical support is definitely a 10/10. I have few issues with Endevor which require technical support. However, when I do submit an issue or question, response is immediate.

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.

The initial Endevor setup was very straightforward. After setting up the system and subsystem information within Endevor, source code is ported into Endevor through a batch process. Endevor keeps track of components for each element, so one part does not move into production without the other parts.

I’m not sure if other options were evaluated. Endevor had already been selected by the time I joined the team.

Do not bring the current process into Endevor. Consider moving forward using standard methodology, and make the move to Endevor a priority project.

It’s a very nice product and runs without errors.

We use it to move our mainframe code through development to production. From a release perspective, my team oversees it, and we help manage that. 

It helps us control what changes we are putting into production. From an audit perspective, just making sure everything is all in one place.

With the newer version, you can do a lot of the automation that you could not do in the past where you had to do manual stuff. Now, we are getting into automation, which makes my life a whole lot easier.

It is interesting because we are just starting to employ some of the new features. We just put a new version in last weekend. 

I would like to see more of automation pieces. I think that is going to be where we need to go to make things faster to get to our customers.

It is the Cadillac of that tool. There is no other tool that matches it on the market today. It is the best, and it is very stable. It has never gone down.

It is very easy to work with, depending on how much you want to employ and how little you want to employ the product. As far as what you run through it, it can be little to huge, no problem. It can manage it.

I have not used the technical support.

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

I was not involved in the initial setup.

IBM. We chose CA because it was the Cadillac tool.

CA is the one that sets the pace for everybody else to follow. We have never had any problems with the tool.

Definitely take a look at it. You can look at the other tools that are out there, but I do not think you are going to find anything better. Also CA's reputation, they back their product 100%.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: The fact that they are there when I need them. CA is definitely that.

The security component of CA Endevor enables you to lock down the source code. It's very important for the source code be secure in a Fortune 500 company. Once you lock it down, you must belong to a specified group to access it. From there, you can view it, you can’t edit or update it. You can look at the source code, but you can't modify it.

I also use CA Endevor to migrate JCL and PARMs from my distributor jobs, which I use for SAP Finance Arm software. I use C7 Scheduler to run batch jobs. For those batch jobs, I use Endevor to migrate the JCL and PARMs. So Endevor is my source code that enables me to bring the JCL and PARMs from AD to ST to QA to production. I create the JCL and PARMs from cycle one; and I migrate all the way up to production. Endevor controls all of this.

For most companies, securing the source code is absolutely essential.

• I would like to see it used for Hadoop, which is really huge now. I would like to see it integrated with that concept.
• It's primarily a mainframe product, but I would love it be more scalable outside of the mainframe, such as on Windows and Unix platforms.
• Durability

CA Endevor is a very scalable product. It's scalable in the sense that I use it for all my distributed scheduling, Java batch, SAP, and mainframe jobs. So three platforms use CA Endevor for JCL control and migration.

Technical support was excellent.

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.

Give CA and their products a try.

It is a tool the mainframe programmers use to do their work. If they need to make a change to a program, they go into Endevor and they check out a copy of the program. Then, they make their changes and check it back into Endeavor, and it gets built or compiled into whatever the language is. When they want to move a copy of it to QA for testing, they use Endevor to do that. Also, when it is time to go into production, they use Endevor to do that. The programmers do all their work through Endevor, and it is their bridge between development and production. 

The benefits are that we backup people's source code for them. They do not have to worry about losing it because Endevor keeps it for them, all kinds of previous versions. Endevor keeps track of everything that auditors need. That is a big thing. Any question that an auditor has about our processes and approvals is all stored in Endevor. We can give them reports and it makes them happy, especially when you work for a bank. 

What I like about Endevor personally is it can be very flexible, as far as how you use it. You can make it do nearly anything, but in really clever ways. It is very versatile. You can really customize it for your own shop pretty extensively, pretty easily. 

It may seem a little abstract, but when somebody approves an Endevor package, if they are able to approve, and let us say there's four different approvals that are needed. If they have the ability to approve at four different levels, and if they check off to approve the package it will approve all the way through. If I would like the person to be able to approve at one level. It doesn't matter which one it is, but they only can choose one thing, then somebody else has to do the other approvals. There is no way around it. I spent an entire day trying really hard once to figure out how to do that. In a shorter sentence, the ability to restrict one approval per approval level would be a big deal for us. 

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 is what they call them. There are a lot of if-then-elses, sometimes it is hard to figure out which if-then-elses it actually did. When you can turn on what they call a trace, but if somebody asks you a question you want to just say, "Which one ran and which one failed?" That's not always easy. That could be a little easier. 

It is very stable. We have no problems.

One thing that is great about CA is that they worked with really big companies for a long time. We have no problems with scalability. It is excellent.

I have only ever opened one case as I am relatively new with the company, but they got right back to me and answered my question quickly. 

I was not involved in the initial setup.

There's really only two mainframe tools that do this, Endevor and something called ChangeMan. I used to support ChangeMan. It is good, but it is a lot simpler. If I was talking to somebody, I might point out the flexibility of the Endevor implementation and how you can do so many different things in really clever ways. 

We are using Endevor as a manager for our software to have the promotion between environments.

The most valuable feature of Endevor is customization and ease of use.

The scalability of Endevor could improve.

I have been using Endevor for approximately 20 years.

I have been using the solution without any problems. It is stable.

I rate the stability of Endevor a ten out of ten.

According to our installations, the stability is good.

We have approximately 350 users are using the solution, such as programmers, analysts, and general IT personnel.

I rate the scalability of Endevor an eight out of ten.

I have not used the support from the vendor.

We have not used other solutions similar to Endevor.

The maintenance of the solution is automated.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Endevor a nine out of ten.

We switched from a home grown Librarian based System to Endevor starting in 2009. The product provides good visibility of code changes, and change history. It provides good security options as well.

The biggest benefit we have gained from using this product is the decrease in deployment errors. With our old system, binds and new copies were done manually based on paperwork filled out by the programmer. Now all that is done through Endevor processors.

The biggest irritation I have is the footprint checking process. Once the footprints get out of sync it is hard to tell what the issue is and to fix it.

Support is quite good for this product, although it has become a little more time consuming lately. All calls now appear to go through a general service person first. I have always gotten attention the same day. Not always a fix or an answer that quick, but at least a response from a service tech letting me know they had the problem and were working on it.

The product is still being actively enhanced and there is a strong user community.

We cut implementation errors by around 99%. Less effort is required by developers to set up migrations and the moves are much easier and less prone to problems.

Endevor can be very rigid. When you install and set up your map which controls the way code moves between stages it is important to be sure it is like you are going to want it for the long hall. The map is complicated to change once code is in flight. Each stage is related to the next and this relationship can only be changed when elements are at specific points in the migration cycle.

We have been using this product since 2009.

The biggest issue we had was kick back from staff that didn't like change. We also picked an installer that had a set way of doing the job and so we have an install we don't like. I would strongly suggest that new users take time to understand the product and the different ways it can be set up instead of letting someone just decide for them.

No issues with stability at all.

No issues with scalability.

Customer service is very good.

Technical support is also very good.

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

The internal setup is complex and rigid. Get it like you want it the first time. The actual product install is not complex.

We used a contract installer recommended to us by another company, not from CA. This company had a set way that they did the installs and we were not proficient enough with the product to object to some of the things that were done. I strongly suggest that new users take the time to understand the product BEFORE the install.

We did evaluate several products including IBM ClearCase and MKS.

Our company uses ROSCOE for it's primary development. Although ROSCOE and Endevor are owned by the same company, the ROSCOE interface for Endevor is many years out of date.