Git vs. IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Git
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
N/AN/A
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is an end-to-end engineering solution used to manage system requirements to design, workflow, and test management, extending the functionality of ALM tools for better complex-systems development.N/A
Pricing
GitIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
GitIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
GitIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Considered Both Products
Git
Chose Git
We migrated from svn to Git and the transition was smooth. We have tools that migrate the complete history along with the authors of the various files and the history from svn to Git. The migration was seamless and easy. We can see complete history of check-in as if we were …
Chose Git
We were using the TortoiseSVN previously and it was super slow when we created a new branch or switched between branches. Git makes our life easy. :)
Chose Git
Git is far superior at merging than SVN and I think every other VCS from what I've heard. It's also by far the most common so using it is a no brainer. Since it's written by the one true king Linus himself there can be no question to its design and architecture.
Chose Git
The only other VCS tool I've used in production is SVN. In my option Git is a better option for several reasons. Reason one is simplicity, actions like reviewing changes, committing or stashing changes, and managing multiple feature branches is much easier with Git. The second …
Chose Git
The two main alternatives to Git that I know about are Mercurial and Subversion. I've never used either one, but I know a bit about Subversion. From what I remember, Subversion requires a server. I don't anyone using any other source control other than Git, it seems to have …
Chose Git
Git is more advanced and easier to use. It has a very simple UI and a very efficient command-line tool. Git gives you flexibility and performance for the price, and has greatly increased the complexity of workflow. The overall performance is good. It caches information locally …
Chose Git
What I know is Perforce and CVS, such other repos tend to store deltas while Git stores the snapshots of the stuff as their commit ID's. This is what makes Git much much faster when you are developing on huge repos, since the checkouts are just instantaneous.
Chose Git
Gitlab provides similar features like Git. Git is more robust, secure and developer-friendly to work on.
Chose Git
There are not many surviving alternatives for Git (maybe SVN) which in itself is quite meaningful. Git is the best versioning system of all time for programming, period. The difference between a good mathematical tool and sending .zip-s around emailing lists or FTP drives is so …
Chose Git
GIT being a widely used tool have better reliability than its peers and have stands out when we compare it on operational performance criteria.
GIT with speedy and extensive branching capabilities have helped developers to use check in their code quickly and space efficient way.
G…
Chose Git
It's easy to use and stable. These are the two strengths I see in Git. It does not need a lot of time to learn, but you still need to learn it. It has high stability. Bugs are not often to see in Git, and the community support is wonderful. With the help of GitHub, you can …
Chose Git
Compared to SVN, Git has a decentralized approach which increases collaboration in the team by enabling the local stored branches. There is no need to be connected to the repository(via an internet link) to work and commit code. Besides the fact that the performance of Git is …
Chose Git
I do not have much experience with other version control tools. Git is highly used everywhere and it is hard to find a development team that isn't using it. One thing I know is that with Git each developer has their own copy of a repository so they could technically work …
Chose Git
Git is the best Source Control Management Tool I've used. Every company, team, and project I've worked on professionally either used Git 100%, or was moving to Git, away from the alternatives like SVN. Git has all the features necessary, as well as a very large community of …
Chose Git
Git is by far the best version control system out there. It's open source, free, and fast. No other version control system I've ever used has had all three features.
Chose Git
Primarily we chose Mercurial, but our customers from abroad choose Git and recommended us to use it within a project that we are doing with them. Git for us is very easy way to contribute to these projects. But from the other side we see that more and more projects and …
Chose Git
For us, we use both Git and GitHub so they were a package. I suppose you could use Git with another VCS/hosting service to track changes if it fit well enough, but for us we just went with design out of the box. We pay for the GitHub private repository for the extra security.
Chose Git
I've used both Apache Subversion & Git over the years and have maintained my allegiance to Git. Git is not objectively better than Subversion. It's different. The key difference is that it is decentralized. With Subversion, you have a problem here: The SVN Repository may be in …
Chose Git
N/A. No other products like Git were used.
Chose Git
Branching and merging are easy: Branching is a walk in the park. It feels like a natural part of the workflow. They are cheap (fast and consume very little space) so that you can branch whenever you want. This means you can sandbox your features and ideas till they are ready …
Chose Git
Git is pretty much the main choice today when choosing a source control system. There are still others out there like Subversion and Mercurial, however I have not evaluated these as they are older than Git and I tend to try to stay on the leading edge of what is in use for the …
Chose Git
Git is a distributed version control system. There is more flexibility to work with a bigger team. You can modify the same file and later merge all changes into a single file.
Chose Git
After using Subversion previously for a number of years, Git comes across as the new and improved source control approach. Git seems very suited to working with Agile:- branches can be created easily, allowing multiple developers to switch to them quickly, and having local …
Chose Git
While my experience is limited on Microsoft Team Foundation Server, my understanding is that it works only for windows development work. This leaves out developers of alternative languages. Since git allows any code to be placed in it (you could even use it to back up plain …
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
The established experience contained in most IBM Rational DOORS installations is only compensated by the high flexibility of Atlassian Jira. The markets state that Jira is less expensive in the setup. There are many manufacturers that support IBM Rational DOORS to have the big …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
I would choose IBM Rational DOORS over any other requirements management tool out there. Polarion tries to do too many things and is great for some things but as far as requirements management IBM Rational DOORS is the best tool on the market.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
It was easier to do all the change management-related activities, even configurations were handled very effectively. New process definitions and initiatives made it easier for better project deliverables. Effective resource allocations and better reporting and defect …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
DOORS is not a suite nor an integrated tool like HP ALM or Rally. It only does one thing and cannot hold defects or accommodate sprint planning. It is older, takes longer to connect and load, and has an inconvenient timeout. It does do a basic job and can be customized to show …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
DOORS is the legacy and leading tool for requirements management. It is widely used by the Aerospace industry.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Although Jira is getting popular in DevOps team, it does not work well with ITIL model as RTC does. RTC is still widely used for production management in our company.

CA Service Desk Manager (GSD) is integrated with TPAM which is being used for privilege account management in …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
To me, DOORS is like a super version of Excel and Word combined with a relational database. I have not used too many database softwares before, but DOORS does a very specific job well enough. It is so powerful that some of the tools just go unused. Some parts of the software …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Requisite Pro (and Rational Requirements Composer, it's successor) is more simple and focused on requirements. Is like a part of DOORS and can be suitable to smaller projects. IT people on the other hand prefer agile tools like Jira. Of course if the project is big enough, …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
My organization was already using it when I joined the team.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
It's well integrated with IBM products so it provides better coverage across the lifecycle with first class integration. Other producst are stand alone with limited integration with ALM tools.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
I found [them] to be more flexible and with the possibility to create [an HTML format].
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
An alternative which I have very briefly used is Atlassian's JIRA, which is very similar to IBM RTC, although has a modern UI, feels light-weight and is faster to respond and additionally has seamless integration with bitbucket, which is a Git platform, and other Atlassian …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
JIRA is simpler and much more intuitive, especially when bundled with confluence. TFS is obvious choice if working with Microsoft technologies and has superb API.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
I have worked on different agile project management tool like JIRA, Teamfoge and RTC. RTC is simple and has a nice UI.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
It is easy for the organization to identify what kind of problems there are in the project and how many change requests have been resolved and how many are pending. Thereby the employer can pro-actively arrange the meetings and address the issues to the team members.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
This product had many of the same features, was easier to use, which would result in less training, and had a lower price tag. Logic and reason do not always figure prominently in a decision. Sometimes there are intangible characteristics that alter the flow. In my observation, …
Best Alternatives
GitIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Small Businesses
GitHub
GitHub
Score 9.0 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitHub
GitHub
Score 9.0 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.8 out of 10
Enterprises
Perforce P4
Perforce P4
Score 7.7 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
GitIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(0 ratings)
8.8
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(0 ratings)
2.1
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.5
(0 ratings)
5.0
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
9.0
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
GitIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Likelihood to Recommend
Git is by far the best Source Control Management Tool I've used. I would recommend it to anyone, whether it's an individual working on their own project, a small start-up company, or a huge organization with thousands of developers. Maintaining code via source control is absolutely mandatory for all developers everywhere.
Read full review
While working on a complex project it is important all the needed change requests are handled in an effective manner, this tool helps us do exactly the same, it had great features to manage those change management tickets, making sure to merge the change with existing workflow, prioritize the requests centrally so there are no duplicates. Easy to collaborate across different teams and colleagues across the aisle.
Read full review
Pros
  • Git is designed to work in a distributed manner, allowing each developer to run a local node that has full control of the project. Through this, the developer is able to merge his work with others on a main 'branch' & work in sync without having to worry about stepping on your other developers toes.
  • Because Git has solved the software problem of dependency, users who commit code that needs to be deleted can just roll back to a restore point, saving precious development time & tons of headaches for Information Technology. This is also very helpful when cloning projects or creating new features on the current project.
  • Git has a beautiful command line interface that is intuitive, easy to learn & extensible. You can also observe all the changes you have made in your project throughout the development with just a few simple commands. This diverse set of command-line tools is easy for the end user & very powerful.
Read full review
  • There are a couple of areas where IBM Rational DOORS is quite strong. First, it is part of the IBM CLM solution so the artifacts developed in this module can be easily available for other functions like development and QA. They can link with their stories and test cases and team leads and managers can use traceability matrix to find out where there are gaps in coverage.
  • Comprehensive configuration management functionality (concept of multiple streams and global configuration) is available, which can be helpful if you need to implement configuration management scenarios for your product or project. For example, a certain version of a requirement can be linked with one story and another version of same requirement can be linked with another story. This is the unique feature which other current tools in the market don't provide.
  • It's highly customizable so you can configure the project areas based on your need. You can have your own requirement types, and you can define templates to speed up the process. Comprehensive review functionality is there as well.
Read full review
Cons
  • Some of the commands are a little obtuse if you're not using a Git Client
  • Since Git is so widely used in the development space, it's easy to believe that growth and innovation might become stale in the area of version control. Competition is sparse these days and I'm curious if this "Standard" is going to keep moving forward somehow.
  • It's hard to fault a tool that is so ubiquitous and hardly gets in your way.
Read full review
  • Too complex for projects or businesses that don't really need the detail. It is basically overkill.
  • If you are new to IBM Rational tools, it may be a medium learning curve. You'd also need lots of training from your people, since, as usual, this tool shouldn't be managed alone.
  • It may seem old fashion compared to Jira and the current control tools used in IT industry.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Git has met all standards for a source control tool and even exceeded those standards. Git is so integrated with our work that I can't imagine a day without it.
Read full review
One of the downsides for us was the capabilities of the native build tools were lacking. The project management and work item tracking capabilities are great and I would recommend the tool to anyone. There is a definite learning curve with RTC as a source control system, and the streams are a concept unique to the product
Read full review
Usability
Git is easy to use most of the time. You mostly use a few commands like commiting, fetch/pull, and push which will get you by for most of time.
Read full review
The UI is terrible and not intuitive. Users need training in order to complete tasks. Much like SAP, it's not the clearest tool. The tracing feature is especially complicated because you must write the scripts yourself. There is a learning curve. Also, even the setup, installation, and logging in each time takes a considerable amount of time.
Read full review
Support Rating
I am not sure what the official Git support channels are like as I have never needed to use any official support. Because Git is so popular among all developers now, it is pretty easy to find the answer to almost any Git question with a quick Google search. I've never had trouble finding what I'm looking for.
Read full review
It does a basic job and has the potential to complete some robust reporting tasks, however, it really is a clunky piece of software with a terrible user interface that makes using it routinely quite unpleasant. Many of our legacy and maintenance projects still use DOORS but our department and company use many alternatives and are looking for better tools.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
It's easy to set up and get going.
Read full review
No problems
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
GIT being a widely used tool have better reliability than its peers and have stands out when we compare it on operational performance criteria. GIT with speedy and extensive branching capabilities have helped developers to use check in their code quickly and space efficient way. GIT have the facility to quickly fetch the complete repository on to your local system.
Read full review
The established experience contained in most IBM Rational DOORS installations is only compensated by the high flexibility of Atlassian JIRA. The markets state that Jira is less expensive in the setup. There are many manufacturers that support IBM Rational DOORS to have the big tiers as their customers. Jira has problems in that growth. Jira has more features compared to IBM Rational DOORS. For example in cloud support, IBM Rational DOORS relies on improved external services while Jira abstracts in the most modern way. Jira experts have a different professional background compared to that of IBM Rational DOORS. They are indeed from different engineering generations. There is little interchange in personal and ideas.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Git has saved our organization countless hours having to manually trace code to a breaking change or manage conflicting changes. It has no equal when it comes to scalability or manageability.
  • Git has allowed our engineering team to build code reviews into its workflow by preventing a developer from approving or merging in their own code; instead, all proposed changes are reviewed by another engineer to assess the impact of the code and whether or not it should be merged in first. This greatly reduces the likelihood of breaking changes getting into production.
  • Git has at times created some confusion among developers about what to do if they accidentally commit a change they decide later they want to roll back. There are multiple ways to address this problem and the best available option may not be obvious in all cases.
Read full review
  • RTC helps automate incident management workflow which improves our work efficiency. With the integration with Geneos and GSD, we can one click create RTC incident tickets from Geneos with most of the information copied from Geneos automatically and then link the details to GSD for privilege account management if needed.
  • RTC provides a holistic view on ad hoc production activities. We use RTC for production management. Whoever needs to get access to production due to non-planned activities (planned change is managed in GSD) has to raise an incident ticket or service request ticket in RTC so as to get production privilege accounts.
  • RTC is also being used to review and approve the usage of privilege account which help us to meet audit requirements. For example, if a user made some database change using privilege account under incident number xxx, an entry will be added in RTC and sent to account owner or production support manager to review and approve.
Read full review
ScreenShots