AccuRev vs. Puppet Enterprise

Very slow and not intuitive; it would be my last choice for version control systems.The UI is a little confusing at times and seems a little outdated. It needs a lot of improvement. It is suited for small projects and fewer number of projects. But if there are huge projects and many projects to be maintained in a portfolio, its a little hard to manage.

Incentivized

Puppet is good enough to get the job done, you can use it to automate deployments and maintain files and configurations, if this is all you're looking for it's great. If you're looking for more control over your systems as a whole without having to write your own scripts or install multiple configuration management systems then Puppet is not what you're looking for.

Incentivized

• One place for most recent code with history, avoid any conflict/confusion among other team/members.
• Stream/Workflow approach to control approval process betwen all the teams, which I couldn't find in other version control tools I worked.
• Bundle our code in a small group (called, Issues in Accurev) to differentiate between different projects.

Incentivized

• Provides a clear map of how a system is configured
• Eases the creation of a system in a specific cluster as it is scripted in code
• Simplifies configuration changes to a cluster or to every system such as rolling out vhost configurations, updating ldap roles, NFS mounts, etc
• The syntax is very easy to read and carries a lot of fluidity once the language is learned.

Incentivized

• Ability to zoom in/out for stream-view. We currently have many streams/substreams and unable to view the entire workflow. Zooming in/out would benefit.
• Being a designer, I use Adobe Flash and SWF files. When updating the SWF files, Accurev does not see these files as being changed and you will be unable to promote. In order to push changes, you must totally rename the SWF file.

Incentivized

• The setup of Puppet is a nightmare compared to ansible. Anyone watching a youtube video can easily set up ansible with minimal IT knowledge. All one needs is the source IP addresses and we are good to go. Setting up Puppet is a more hands-on task and pushing the puppet agents to all the boxes is another issue. If the installation and setup were simplified like ansible that would attract a lot of people to this platform
• The syntax of the code for Puppet is not as easy as ansible. Ansible simply follows a YAML format and it's like typing in normal English. Even complicated tasks can be written by just understanding YAML syntax. Perhaps Puppet needs to revisit the lanugage used and try to come up with a much simpler lanugage for writing code. This will make day-to-day usage easier.

Incentivized

We will renew because it is part of our build process.

Incentivized

Puppet has top class support. You can simply mail them with their query and they will respond to your query in a timely manner. We do have enterprise license for puppet. Also there is a vibrant community for puppet out there. So even if you dont purchase a premium support option you can simply google your queries and get answers

Incentivized

In my view, accurev ranks very low compared to other tools I have used. Microsoft TFS is the best in the industry as of today as it's a complete ALM solution. It does code version, bug tracking, user story documentation, and has easy integration with other external tools supporting many languages. So I would definitely recommend TFS to anyone.

Incentivized

HPSA is a licensed product and incurs significant upfront investment costs due to COTS licensing. Puppet Data Center Automation has a significantly lower upfront investment and product documentation is more readily available. Chef is a very similar offering, however, at the time our decision was considered, the adoption of Chef vs. Puppet was significantly less in the community.

Incentivized

• Better team coordination.
• Avoid confusion by having one place for all documentation and code.
• Better project management by having different work streams.

Incentivized

• Cut deployment times down to around 1 hour from 4-5 hours.
• Allows us to get a fully running system up from scratch in around 30 minutes.
• Allows for a more clear view of what is required to get a host running.

Incentivized