OpenText AccuRev Reviews

We needed to use it now for our goals of compliance, for native quality management systems and also for the legacy systems. 

The stability could be improved

all features was founded 

To improve the product, it needs some enhancement to the application's interface to be more user-friendly.

The product has all the features that we need and we can depend upon it. My issue with the product is that it is not easy to use without a guide or a proper manual. That is my point. It is not very friendly to use. For example, we may need the application to be more friendly in other sorts of ways. If we have an integrated module that allows access to the features we want through one click, you do not need to make it two or three clicks on the screen. The interface can be better designed to easily provide access to the features you need.

The feature I would like to see in the next release is just for it to be more friendly to use and to be like a smart application that intuits your movement through the application. It needs to be something that works smoothly and intelligent without any complicated navigation of screens. 

I have been using the product since the start of 2018, or almost two years.

I don't have any first-hand information about performance and stability because I'm not the right person to answer those questions. But I have not received any negative feedback from my team about a lack of stability.

As management, I know how many people are using this product. We have about 60 users.

As far as how extensively we use AccuRev, it is a product we only use from time to time as needed. Right now we have no reason to scale usage.

I don't deal with any of the support or customer service because we already have a team for that. The user guide or product manual that is integrated into the system is not fully functional and does not have complete information about the application. When we use it, it is hard to find the help we need. This is really part of customer service and there is not enough information there.

We used a lot of different products before this one. One was Micro Focus. AccuRev has similar features, but money-wise it is cheaper than Micro Focus. Right now, money-wise, I am not sure that either is worth the investment. Our budget controls our work environment.

The AccuRev product is okay. The main difference between AccuRev and Micro Focus is that Micro Focus is a huge name. You can depend on it. But it is not easy for a consultant or anyone working in the software development area to develop the experience they need to use a product. Those working with it need some awareness of the product and they need some time to be working with it. It is not simple like Oracle or Microsoft that everyone uses. The dynamic is different because you can't just buy it directly in a store. It needs some technical expertise brought in from some other company. The problem is kind of considered a technical problem. It is not a product problem. Developing the experience is the problem.

As far as choosing AccuRev, I liked this product in the beginning but there are difficulties with using and learning it. Currently, we use JIRA and we are using it for cost and ease-of-use.

I don't know exactly about the installation of the system because the installation is handled by another team. I'm at the level of top management and a C-level executive, so I don't know if the implementation and installation are easy or not. But I don't have any complaints from the team that they have difficulties with installation and maintenance.

We are already consultants ourselves, so we have our consultants on our existing team. We deploy the product by ourselves.

We have seen a bonified return on investment.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate AccuRev as an eight.

We primarily use the solution just for testing.

The most valuable feature of the solution is taking snapshots while doing the execution of the test cases.

I personally don't see any room for improvement. As it is now, the solution is very good.

The pricing should be more competitive.

It would be ideal if the solution offered more testability.

We've been using the solution for five to six years.

The solution is quite stable.

The solution is very scalable and it's been quite scalable for our organization's purpose. We have about 800 users on it currently. Mostly the users are IT managers and testers as well as IT admins from the IT department of our company.

We've never reached out to technical support.

I did not handle the initial setup of the solution so I can't talk to the level of complexity involved or if it was straightforward or complex.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing this solution.

We aren't using the latest version of the solution. We use the on-premises deployment model.

We use the solution on a daily basis.

I'd recommend the solution to others. I'd rate it nine out of ten.

The automation has helped to improve my organization. 

The most valuable feature is the Business Process Testing feature, BPT, because it brings in the most revenue.

Stability needs improvement. It has some minor defects that could be improved. The biggest issue with this product is not actually the product itself, but the lack of knowledge that customers have regarding what they can do with all of the features. They need to learn how to use and practice some particular functions. They need to learn about risk assessment and other facets. The customer's maturity is not equal to the product's full potential. The customers should get more training.

In the next release, I would like to have a repository for the code which is embedded. Apart from that, it has everything I need.

It's 98% stable. 

It's 100% percent scalable. I have no problem with that. It has a tremendous capacity.

Everybody uses this solution. The company uses the solution. The users have different roles like business analysts, project managers - everybody is using it.

We do have plans to increase usage as our customer base grows. 

I would rate their technical support as eight out of ten. For a simple problem, they are very fast and accurate but for the more complicated problems, their response tends to delay quite a lot because they need to do research. Sometimes we figure out the solution before they give us an answer. 

In a tool like this, the responses can be complicated. If I were to compare it to another product on the market like JIRA, that is less complex, that will take less time to get an answer because it is a less complex product. This solution is more complex so it will take the support more time to research a solution. I understand why their responses can take a while. We can find answers online, from community support groups but the technical support can't search for an answer online. 

I have used many solutions throughout my career, but this is the best there is. I chose this solution because of its complexity. It is not missing any functions or features. I can do anything I need to with it.

We prefer to install it for our customers but sometimes they prefer to do it themselves. The installation is very easy. There are no problems with it. It's not complicated at all. The deployment takes around one to one and a half days. 

We have a permanent license. 

With this tool, I learned how to put together all the pieces from the life cycle and the interactions between departments. The theory which is embedded in the solution actually helped me to understand how all the departments in an IT department are interconnected and how they work. I went to some of my customers and just made the connection between the team based on what I learned from the tool. On top of that, I learned some business analyst tips and tricks on how to make a workflow useful. The most important thing I learned from this solution was how to interconnect people with different skills and make them work together.

I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

The automation has been the biggest organizational improvement.

The most valuable feature is the BPT, the Business Process Testing.

The stability could be improved. It has some minor defects. 

The biggest issue with this product is not actually the product itself, but the lack of knowledge of customers regarding what they could do with this solution. Customers need to learn about risk assessment and impact matters, etc. Without the clients understanding how to use the solution, the solution itself will not be useful.

What I'm missing from the solution is a repository for the code. Something like Git, for example. Some sort of depository for the code that is embedded.

The solution is 98% stable. It's okay, but there are places where it could be improved.

The solution is 100% scalable. It's much more scalable than the customer's capacity for implementing it. We do plan to increase usage ourselves.

Technical support is good. On a scale of one to ten, I would give them eight. For simple questions, they are quite responsive. They're very, very fast. For more difficult and technical problems they seem to delay their response. It takes them time to research an answer if it's technical. Sometimes we come up with a solution before they give us an answer.

We didn't use a different solution previously.

The initial setup is very easy. We have customers that implement it themselves. It's not complicated. Deployment takes about one day, maximum.

Ideally, we handle the implementation for our customers.

The license is very straightforward. There aren't any other add-ons. We have a permanent license.

We evaluated many options. We chose AccuRev because of the complexity. We can do anything on it.

We typically deal with on-premises deployment models.

I would advise customers to understand the underlying concepts so that they are able to better understand how to use the solution.

I would rate the solution ten out of ten.

• Stability
• Replication
• OS portability
• Source code management

Source code conflicts are like evil twins.

I've used it for seven years.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

9/10.

9/10.

We did have a previous solution and we switched because AccuRev is a better tool in general.

It was a complex setup.

We implemented it in-house.

• It's a stable product
• Get support

The automatic merging provided by AccuRev's unique stream inheritance model allows us to rapidly integrate in a multi-stream process model. AccuRev's change packages(Issues) let us promote by business request rather than try and remember all the changes we made for a business request. The flexible stream structure allows us to adapt to any SDLC we have in-house or want to experiment with.

AccuRev's stream structure is highly flexible and allows us to model any SDLC we need to. AccuRev Issues allows us to promote changes by business defined request instead of trying to remember what files and versions of files changed for a business request. This allows high visibility of what changes are in a given agile iteration and at what stage they are in the SDLC.

Because AccuRev is a centralized SCM, Microfocus will always need to work to improve performance relative to distributed SCM. A one to one match is not possible but they do allow integration with Git for those who prefer a distributed model.

I've used it for three years.

None. Administration is by far the easiest of the many SCM systems I have worked with.

None. Minor bugs have been encountered but they never left me with a feeling that we had a stability problem with AccuRev.

None so far. We have had three years of use after migrating from ClearCase UCM. We have migrated all developments into their own AccuRev depots on a single server with no degradation in performance.

Excellent. Our original pre-sales technical contact is now in a different position within the sales organization, but is still willing to field questions, and get the right resources involved to speed up the delivery of customer service. They also involve customers in sprint-reviews to provide input on upcoming major enhancements.

Excellent. The staff is very knowledgeable and willing to answer seemingly mundane questions quickly. They are also willing to involve deeper development resources quickly for more complicated questions.

We used ClearCase UCM before moving to AccuRev. We were tired of spending hundreds of man-hours a year working around limitations in ClearCase UCM. Our search for a new SCM system started with a very wide berth, and included both centralized and distributed systems. AccuRev was proven to be the best for our needs after an extensive evaluation.

AccuRev is extremely easy to install, administer and maintain. The most complicated step in our transition from ClearCase was in transferring baselines and work-in-progress from all our development streams. We worked closely with AccuRev on a plan and they came on site to monitor the cross-over.

A member of the AccuRev technical support staff came on-site during the cross-over weekend. We had planned and practiced the cross-over process with this person before he arrived. He monitored, advised and provided training to staff as the last step of our cross-over and he had a deep knowledge of the product. With lots of practice ahead of time, it meant he was mostly bored during his time with us.

In our internal purchasing process we estimated the savings in man-hours per iteration would be eight hours per 13 development teams per month. We have easily achieved this, and additionally, we moved from three ClearCase Admins to one and a half AccuRev Admins.

Of course there are acquisition costs associated with licensing. We also allocated a Windows VM internally, not a bug chunk of iron. We chose the most flexible licenses and spent a fair amount of time testing our cross-over plan in close cooperation with AccuRev tech support. The actual cross-over took one and a half days.

The day-to-day costs are minimal from an administrators perspective as we coach developers on the best way to achieve what they want to do.

We did an extensive evaluation based on internal functional and performance criteria. We looked at distributed and centralized SCM systems to replace our usage of ClearCase SCM. We evaluated:

• Git
• Mercurial
• SVN
• Perforce
• PlasticSCM
• AccuRev.

Get over the different nomenclature AccuRev uses as it really isn't a big deal. AccuRev has a very unique value proposition based on three features, in my opinion:

1. Flexible stream structure allows you to model any SDLC
2. Stream Inheritance allows complex stream structures to integrate rapidly like they are all on "trunk"
3. Built-in change packages through AccuRev Issues let developers and business owners promote by business request, not a collection of changes you hope match the business request

User friendly GUI
Demote
Change Packages

It has a user friendly UI which has been very much appreciated by our organization.

• Performance
• Support for long stream structure
• Secondary master server
• Reporting

Using AccuRev for more than three years.

There was a challenge to convert data from the existing SCM tool to AccuRev.

The tool has an issue whereby it restarts its services on its own. We may not know when it will restart again, but we have asked the technical team to work on this. Hopefully, they will fix it soon.

• Performance degrades when many users hit the server at the same time
• The server process consumes more memory if it is running for many days

Customer service is good however, it would be better if they could provide on call support which helps us address issues ASAP. If not, we have to wait for their response on their ticket tool.

Good.

Previously we were using ClearCase. We switched to because of two reasons:

1. The user friendly UI
2. License Cost
3. Good features

We used a vendor team.

Yes, ClearCase/Perforce/CVS.

Suitable tool for mid sized team

Easy to use on Window platform. Good feature set. Allows custom applications for merge and difference engines. Allows cross promotion between streams. Good packaging features.

Limited reporting features for management.