Supercharge Your Project Lifecycle Management with the Right Toolchain setup

December 3, 2024 – Reading time: 14 minutes

Imagine you are responsible for a software project that is both exciting and challenging, with deadlines that must be met and high standards to be maintained. Despite having an excellent development team and a clear vision, every step you take feels like walking through quicksand. The building process is unnecessarily lengthy, errors are occurring at an unacceptable rate, and your team is struggling to keep up due to outdated and inefficient procedures. Despite your best efforts, the pace of progress seems to be slow. Now consider the potential benefits of having the appropriate toolchain in place, with automated testing, seamless integrations, and rapid build times. The result is a cohesive operation, with a unified team, reliable code, prompt identification of issues, and seamless deployment. The key to this success is a robust tool system. It not only ensures stability but also accelerates the project, enhancing each stage from development to delivery. 

A connected toolchain can streamline the development process by ensuring that each stage is validated and verified:

• Pointing out and updating stakeholder needs
• Deriving requirements (system and software)
• Developing the architecture
• Support by developing software
• Manage integration
• Automated testing, seamless integration, and rapid iterations
• Linkage and traceability of all process stages
• Providing a history for changes

INVENSITY offers crucial support by assessing tool and process alignment, ensuring smooth integration and optimization of your toolchain. This enables your team to focus on innovation, supported by a robust and efficient system.

Selecting the right toolchain is crucial for efficient workflows and project success. A single, all-inclusive tool simplifies processes, boosts traceability, eases maintenance, and cuts licensing costs. Alternatively, a multitool approach allows teams to use specialized tools for each phase—development, testing, or architecture—taking advantage of their strengths and offering flexibility to switch tools as needed.

This article narrows its focus to the debate between one-tool versus multiple-tools at the software level. While a broader analysis of lifecycle management tools would be extensive, the article compares PTC Integrity and GitHub on integration and version control. It then moves on to evaluate PTC Integrity, Codebeamer, and Polarion, comparing their strengths and suitability for different areas of lifecycle management.

Moving forward, the analysis focuses on comparing PTC Integrity with Windchill RV&S. PTC Integrity from PTC is well established in the automotive and defence, and other complex software developing industries. It’s a robust lifecycle management tool, encompassing requirement management, test management, development. The desktop client version is particularly stable and allows, for dependent customization and automation through scripting, including Python extensions. PTC is well suited for following the SPICE process, with good requirements handling and continuous integration for build processes like Jenkins for example. However, its traceability could be improved, as the need to navigate through multiple windows can make the process cumbersome.

On the downside, PTC Integrity is an older tool, which shows in its lack of intuitiveness and performance issues, particularly in large projects. The tool is also expensive, requires a license, and is not cloud-based. PTC does offer other cloud-native products, such as Windchill PLM, that can integrate with Windchill RV&S. Moreover, it is prone to freezing, especially during complex software builds, and managing merge conflicts can be challenging. Its SQL-based architecture often leads to performance bottlenecks in large enterprises, where the complexity of projects can cause servers to freeze, disrupting workflow.

Widely recognized for its open-source capabilities, GitHub offers a straightforward build process with available GUIs. It’s particularly strong at handling merges, automatically resolving conflicts unless the same line of code is affected. GitHub makes it easy to revert changes with just a few clicks, providing a user-friendly experience. The platform also enforces strict code review processes, requiring approvals before integration, which enhances code quality. GitHub integrates seamlessly with Jenkins, allowing for flexible and efficient build management. Its branching system is less restrictive, supporting multiple simultaneous integrations without disrupting the main project line.

However, GitHub also has some challenges. Users need to be familiar with Git commands and managing long pull requests can be tedious. While requirements management is possible, it’s not a typical use case for GitHub.

While PTC Integrity excels in specific, highly regulated industries with its comprehensive lifecycle management capabilities, its performance and usability issues in large-scale projects cannot be overlooked. GitHub, on the other hand, offers a more modern, flexible, and user-friendly environment, especially for teams looking for a streamlined, cloud-integrated solution. Ultimately, the choice between PTC Integrity and GitHub should be based on the specific needs of your project and organization. An overview is given in Figure 1.

After evaluating GitHub and PTC Integrity in terms of integration and version control, the focus shifts to a broader comparison at the project lifecycle management level. Here, PTC Integrity, Codebeamer, and Polarion are examined in terms of their functionalities as complete lifecycle management tools. The focus is on analysing their strengths, weaknesses, and areas of application to provide a well-rounded understanding of each tool’s suitability for different project requirements and business environments.

When comparing project lifecycle management tools for requirements management, traceability, design, and implementation, Codebeamer, INTEGRITY/PTC, and Polarion emerge as prominent contenders. Each tool offers different strengths and caters to different organizational needs, although they share some common functionalities. In the following chapter we want to compare the tools between: Requirements Management, Traceability, Design & Architecture, Implementation as well as verification and validation.

1. Requirements Management

   All three tools—Codebeamer, INTEGRITY/PTC, and Polarion—offer robust requirements management capabilities, but they do so with varying levels of depth and customization.

   • Codebeamer stands out for its strong support for hierarchical structuring of requirements, real-time collaboration, and compliance tracking, particularly in highly regulated industries. It’s designed for handling both functional and non-functional requirements efficiently, with built-in features that simplify audit readiness and risk management.
   • INTEGRITY/PTC provides more basic requirement management capabilities, sufficient for organizations with simpler needs. While it allows for the creation and tracking of requirements, it doesn’t offer the advanced compliance and hierarchical structuring that Codebeamer and Polarion provide.
   • Polarion is deeply integrated with Siemens PLM tools, making it ideal for managing complex and safety-critical requirements. It is especially effective in environments that require stringent adherence to standards such as ISO 26262 and DO-178C.

   Commonality: All three tools support the creation and management of requirements, but Codebeamer and Polarion offer more advanced features, particularly for compliance and industry-specific needs.

   Differences: Codebeamer and Polarion excel at handling complex, regulated requirements, whereas INTEGRITY/PTC is better suited for simpler projects.

2. Traceability

   Traceability is a key feature of project lifecycle tools, and here, the three tools offer varying levels of automation and detail.

   • Codebeamer provides exceptional traceability by automatically linking requirements to design, implementation, testing, and validation. This ensures that every requirement is easily traceable throughout the project lifecycle, with customizable dashboards and comprehensive audit trails.
   • INTEGRITY/PTC also supports traceability but may require more manual effort and customization to achieve the same level of detail. Its basic capabilities are sufficient for mid-sized projects, but larger, more complex projects might face performance issues.
   • Polarion provides robust traceability, similar to Codebeamer, with automatic linking and strong support for large-scale, complex requirements. It provides detailed traceability matrices and audit trails, making it highly scalable.

   Commonality: All three tools support traceability requirements, but the depth and automation of this feature vary.

   Differences: Codebeamer and Polarion offer advanced, automated traceability with robust auditing capabilities, whereas INTEGRITY/PTC requires more manual input and might struggle with larger projects.

3. Design and Architecture

   Design and architecture support differ significantly among these tools, particularly in their ability to integrate with modeling tools and handle complex architectural designs.

   • Codebeamer integrates well with modeling tools like Enterprise Architect and MATLAB Simulink, supporting UML, SysML, and other modeling standards. It maintains strong performance even in complex architectural designs, making it suitable for detailed system design.
   • INTEGRITY/PTC provides basic design and architecture support, often requiring additional third-party tools for more detailed modeling. It lacks the robust native support for complex designs that Codebeamer and Polarion offer.
   • Polarion excels at system design, especially when integrated with Siemens PLM tools like Teamcenter. It offers strong support for UML and SysML through integrations, optimized for handling complex, large-scale architectures.

   Commonality: All tools provide some level of design and architecture support, but they vary significantly in depth. Codebeamer and Polarion offer more advanced capabilities through specialized integrations, making them better suited for complex, multi-domain projects.

   Differences: Codebeamer and Polarion are better suited for detailed, complex architectural designs, with strong integration capabilities, while INTEGRITY/PTC offers more basic support.

4. Implementation

   When it comes to implementation, the tools differ in their integration capabilities and how they handle third-party tools.

   • Codebeamer offers strong integration with ALM and PLM tools, with out-of-the-box support for tools like Bitbucket, GitLab, Jenkins, and Jira Software. It’s highly flexible and customizable, accommodating various development methodologies such as Agile and DevOps.
   • INTEGRITY/PTC provides good integration with ALM/PLM tools but often requires custom development to meet specific needs. While it supports third-party tools, it is generally less customizable compared to Codebeamer and Polarion.
   • Polarion integrates seamlessly into Siemens’ ecosystem and offers connectors for popular tools such as Jira and Jenkins. Furthermore, it supports native GitLab source code traceability for Gitlab 9.0 or higher for common Git repositories which expands its use in certain environments.

   Commonality: All tools support integration with third-party ALM and PLM tools, facilitating a comprehensive implementation process.

   Differences: Codebeamer is the most flexible in terms of integration, while Polarion is optimized for use within the Siemens ecosystem. INTEGRITY/PTC although capable, often requires more customization to achieve similar results.

5. Verification/Validation

   The software development lifecycle and engineering processes rely heavily on testing, verification, and validation to make sure that products and systems meet specifications, operate as intended, and produce desired results. Each contributes in a different but complementary way to the overall quality assurance process.

   • Codebeamer offers strong capabilities in test case management, traceability, and compliance, making it suitable for industries requiring rigorous testing and validation. It links test results back to requirements and has detailed reporting features.
   • INTEGRITY/PTC supports integration with various test automation tools. It has real time dashboards with test coverage and defect tracking. However, the dashboard does not provide a good overview of the test cases and their results. Although it offers both automated and manual test case management, the test sessions mainly need to be filled out manually.
   • Polarion excels at providing a unified solution with comprehensive test management, real-time reporting, and end-to-end traceability that is suitable for organizations looking for integrated ALM platform.

   Commonality: Complete test case management, including both automated and manual testing, with complete traceability from requirements to defects, is provided by all three technologies. In addition to offering real-time dashboards and comprehensive data for tracking test execution and coverage, they also enable industry compliance.

   Differences: With an open API and plugin support, Codebeamer can be easily customized to fit different processes and has an intuitive, modern interface. PTC Integrity (Windchill RV&S) has a more conventional interface that can be challenging to use, but it interfaces deeply with the PTC ecosystem and offers moderate customization. On the other hand, Polarion ALM is renowned for its strong configurability, support for customized workflows, and an intuitive interface that strikes a compromise between usability and robust features.

6. Customer Support

   Customer support is a crucial aspect of tool adoption and long-term satisfaction, and here again, the tools offer different levels of service.

   • Codebeamer provides extensive support options, including email, helpdesk, phone support, and various training formats. It is available both on-premises and as a cloud solution, offering flexibility based on the organization’s needs.
   • INTEGRITY/PTC offers 24/7 live support as well as chat and training resources. However, it is limited to on-premises deployments, and some functionalities are reported to be slow, with less flexibility for customization.
   • Polarion offers similar support to Codebeamer, with a range of options including cloud-based and on-premises deployments. However, it has been criticized for licensing issues and performance challenges in large environments.

   Commonality: All tools offer robust customer support, ensuring that users have access to help when needed.

   Differences: Codebeamer and Polarion provide more flexible deployment options and broader support, while INTEGRITY/PTC is more restricted and less customizable.

In retrospect, Codebeamer, INTEGRITY/PTC, and Polarion each offer distinct advantages depending on the specific needs. Codebeamer is well suited for organizations that require strong compliance, traceability, and flexibility. INTEGRITY/PTC is better suited for mid-size projects with simpler requirements, offering a solid but more basic solution. Polarion is ideal for complex, safety-critical environments, especially when used within the Siemens ecosystem.

To summarize the content from above the tables below give an overview of the comparison between the first summarizes the three life cycle management tools and the second one sum up the comparison between PTC Integrity and GitHub.

In conclusion, selecting the right toolchain — whether a single comprehensive tool or a multi-tool approach — is essential for effective project lifecycle management. Each option has distinct advantages: a single, integrated tool can streamline processes, reduce complexity, and lower costs, while a multi-tool approach offers flexibility, customization, and the ability to leverage specialized functionalities. The comparisons in this article demonstrate that while GitHub and PTC Integrity excel in software integration and version control, tools like Codebeamer and Polarion bring unique strengths in requirements management and system design.

For a more detailed discussion and personalized guidance on selecting the right toolchain for your specific project, our INVENSITY experts will be happy to assist. INVENSITY is here to help your business and project to determine the unique requirements and ensure the availability of the appropriate resources and plans in place for a successful outcome. Our experienced colleagues bring a wide range of knowledge and skills to the table, having worked widely in a variety of industries. They have successfully managed multiple projects by analysing, redefining and accompany the realization of a project lifecycle toolchain change. Partnering with INVENSITY grants you access to our extensive industry expertise and established methodologies, empowering you to advance your projects with confidence. We invite you to reach out to our specialists to explore how we can support you in achieving your objectives effectively.

Author

Contact person

Resources