IBM DOORS Reviews

I use IBM DOORS because my customer wants it for managing their requirements.

IBM DOORS is a tool from the 20th century. It is very old but capable of storing, organizing, and exchanging requirements. It helps to manage requirements efficiently, which significantly improves the way requirements are managed.

A few of our organization's customers use IBM DOORS for confidential documents. One of our customers used the tool to establish traceability for certain documents because solutions like PTC Integrity were not mature enough to handle it a decade ago. The aforementioned customer used IBM DOORS for requirement management and to transfer all data from MS Excel to IBM DOORS. 

IBM DOORS offers seamless integration functions with other third-party tools such as Jama and Polarion. But PTC Integrity is more flexible than IBM DOORS. 

IBM DOORS has a well-refined ASPICE template, which is absent in competitor solutions such as PTC Integrity. 

We use IBM Rational DOORS for listing requirements. It's a very powerful software for that. All of the specifications for the project are put inside, and then you can link them to all the documents, architecture, and disciplines.

It's a very interesting tool. I like that it's simple. You have to create your document, add your templates, and have your headings and definitions, and it's done. You must attribute the discipline and fill out the comment field for requirements. It also provides you with unique IDs for each requirement. I like that it never duplicates IDs.

DOORS facilitates the adoption of a chain toward DevOps architectures. Using all the IBM Rational tools, we can trace all activities related to a project, from beginning to design to development. 

For example, we use Rational Rhapsody to design models, incorporate requirements, and then generate software from those models. We also use Rational Team Concert to plan tests and Jenkins for continuous delivery.

The biggest improvement for me is definitely the ability to use DOORS in a web environment through Rational DOORS Next Generation. Integrating with Rational Team Concert via the web interface has also been beneficial. 

However, not all Rational Team Concert operations are available from the web client. Certain operations, like creating streams or components, still require using the desktop application. They're not accessible through the web interface.

And in my opinion, this limitation should be removed.

Creating streams, components, etc. We still need the desktop app for those.

DOORS has enabled flexibility in mapping requirements to the software. Tracking changes over time due to team meetings and other factors is important. 

Additionally, I've been using DOORS Next Generation, the web-based tool, especially in the last year.

The most valuable feature of this solution is traceability.  We can trace every requirement, including what the stakeholder must do and component-level requirements. We can trace them easily, which is very beneficial.

It is easy to use. You can use it easily. 

It is similar to an improved Excel spreadsheet. It is also simple to use for a newly graduated engineer.

I am not sure if this is due to our infrastructure, but the server is a little slow. Perhaps this is due to our computers or connections. My issue is that it's slow.

I am not sure if the solution is on IBM's or our company's side.

Both the performance and the price could be improved.

The solution is used to meet the requirements of system design from the user level to the supplier level, let's say. So it is used to have all the requirements integrated into only one database and link them with the different suppliers or stakeholders. So that's the main use, and we use it for those databases, basically.

I would say that the best feature of the solution is that since everything is in one place, and if you make any changes, then they are recorded or tracked. Also, it is very good to have the totality between different levels. Being able to pull up the information from different modules, especially from one of those that you want the information to be presented, basically keeps everything clear and quite well-presented. The only downside of the solution is its performance, which is quite low sometimes. But in terms of the best thing about the solution, I can say that it gives you confidence. If you enter the solution and let it stay like it is, there are not going to be any issues or any loss of information for these companies.

I am currently working for a startup company, helping them establish the requirement engineering process. We have installed Classic DOORS, and we are satisfied with the tool. I am an IBM partner reseller, and I have many years of experience running my engineering office. I have written numerous DxL scripts for communication. I am the managing director and a mechanical engineer.

I really enjoyed the API. I developed many applications on DOORS Classic. I received the silver and platinum medals from IBM for some test management features and the DOORS exchange tool. However, not frequently. In developing and programming, I figured out that IBM's intellectual competence was not as satisfactory compared to Telelogic times. 

I recommend Classic DOORS to my clients as it is a safe and simple tool. However, many of my customers find it complicated, especially due to the auto-updating and undocumented changes by scripting inside the source code. The service during Telelogic times was much better than when IBM took over.

My primary use case is for the development and management of requirements, traceability of requirements up and down the architecture chain, and verification.

I like the user interface with regard to creating links between requirements and tracing links to requirements.

I like the DXL Wizard, in particular, to build custom views that I save.

I am a fan of the DOORS Change Proposal System, although a lot of people where I'm working have their own homegrown system. I continue to push them to migrate to the DOORS CPS.