CA Application Lifecycle Conductor vs. OpenText ALM Octane

If someone is already using ALM Octane, then it is worth the pain to go through the upgrade process to get the current versions. If you need it to tie into Jira, it can do that. Just be prepared for a rough road. If you have some other product that you use for DevOps, PM, and QA, you will probably be better off sticking with what you have. DaVita also uses TFS, but not in a full implementation (i.e. not with a build server for code deployment), so for them, ALM makes a lot of sense. If you are using TFS with a build server, there are other methodologies that won't end up making you want to pull your hair out trying to make it integrate with what you are using.

Incentivized

• Bug-logging and keeping track of the bug status.
• Integration with DevOps to do continuous testing.
• Keeping coordination between development and testing teams.

Incentivized

• The integration to Synchronizer is very difficult to implement.
• The integration to Jira was very hard to get working.

Incentivized

Customer support is very good takes minimal time to resolve the issue and always takes feedback seriously to improve the application.

Incentivized

Micro Focus ALM Octane use at DaVita goes back beyond my starting with them three years ago. They have used it as part of DevOps as well as for performance measurement of software releases in combo with HP Performance Center (a great combination). Jira is well suited to managing bug reports and development processes with Agile and Scrum, but ALM Octane goes above and beyond that.

Incentivized

• It's had a very positive impact.
• Very good customer support as well when required.

Incentivized