Aldon and .Net Development

Question

I'm looking for feedback from .Net developers who have experience with Aldon as a lifecycle management platform. We're seriously considering using Aldon for lifecycle management including source control, automated builds, etc. I know there are a lot of other options out there, but ours is primary an AS/400 shop (with AS/400 programmers outnumbering .Net developers 6 to 1), and Aldon is used already by our iSeries team. The benefit we're looking for is having one lifecycle management suite.

Basically, I'm looking for opinions from people who have used Aldon and another set of tools (perhaps TFS, or a combination of SVN, Cruise Control, etc). If you've worked with both, do you have a recommendation on whether this is a good idea, or a bad idea? It's obviously a big choice, so any feedback would be helpful.

Edit - Added

No answers or comments... AND my first Tumbleweed badge. I'm not sure if this is just a bad question, if nobody actually USES Aldon to manage their .NET work, or if there's just nobody using Aldon that used other products and can offer a comparison.

So, I'm offering a bounty to sweeten the deal, and broadening the scope of the question... If there are any people out there USING Aldon at all, can you provide any information on issues you have had, is it a good suite of tools, frustrations, or gotchas, things you love, etc?

Added -even more Our primary goal is to have one product to manage both our .NET and our AS/400 (primarily RPG) development. If you have a suggestion for a different suite of tools, or have tried it and decided it isn't worth it, I'll take that answer as well.

Answer 1

I think you will find nobody here uses it. .NET people fall into two categories - those that are "cheap" (i.e. trying to save costs) and then basically you look or something like open source. And those who pay a lot, and most of those go with Team System - because it is ingtegrated into Visual Studio from the bottom up. AS/400 is a pretty rare intermix for .NET developers, so, at the end - you possibly are just out of luck.

I Personally am not sure I would even bother with it. THere is a lot more to soemthing like Team System than tracking source etc. - lots of good testing features, build in continuous integration etc., and all that without running through hoods in order to - well - get then an inferior product.

Answer 2

I'm working in a shop similar to yours--in our case, there is a substantial legacy code base of iSeries COBOL code, and a growing number of .NET systems--and the .NET developers have successfully lobbied to use Subversion for source control. In my admittedly brief time evaluating the product, it seemed like Aldon was not very flexible at all in areas like branching and tagging, and has a very cumbersome and arcane interface. Since product lifecycles are (mis)managed separately in our shop anyway, limiting the .NET use of Aldon to source control only, it was a simple decision. In the .NET world, Aldon lags far behind the standard open source tools in features and usability, and has no hope of competing with TFS. In our case, managing .NET code outside of Aldon has definitely increased developer productivity and decreased frustration.

One example...coming from a Subversion shop, I was trying to find out how to create an experimental branch in Aldon. If it is possible at all, the documentation did a great job of obscuring the feature, and our Aldon admin had never come across the concept. Everything in our shop is locked down tight, with admin rights needed to create projects, versions, etc. This might be worthwhile from a lifecycle management standpoint, but from the perspective of a developer trying to get work done, it is a killer. I don't think lifecycle management and source control belong in the same software, and Aldon has done nothing to dissuade me from that opinion.

Answer 3

We encountered the same problem at my workplace a few years back when we started up our first .NET project in the midst of a bunch of RPG developers. At the time, we chose to use a separate source control system (Subversion) for anything written in .NET (or for anything else that somebody wanted to use it for). We moved all of our projects (.NET and AS/400) into Gemini for time and defect tracking purposes. Basically, we chose a single product to manage our .NET and AS/400 projects at a high level but different tools for version control, automated builds, automated testing, etc.

Years later I can happily say that this has worked out quite well for us. I really can't think of any issues this has caused - but can attest to the fact that it has avoided some potential headaches and butting of heads. I do think that you will have an easier time finding (good) .NET developers by choosing a widely used version control system. I can't speak for anyone else, but for me the use of a version control system I have never even heard of would be a bit of a red flag in an interview situation.