Talk:Application lifecycle management

message: ALM implies also the end of life and related activities. However the definition and tool sets seams to focus only on the beginning of application life.
Long story short - I am missing decommissioning and legal long term archiving steps.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.248.249.57 (talk) 20:45, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  whole lifecycle? 

message: Reads like this shares very similar concepts with Agile , should this be explored? 86.0.57.249 (talk) 15:03, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No one has responded to this yet, *but* Agile development methods are one particular approach to software development, while Application Lifecycle Management is a bit broader in scope, and while you could potentially use Agile methods within the scope of ALM, you could just as easily be using non-Agile methodologies (Waterfall, iterative, v-model, what-have-you). Wererooster (talk) 03:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Similarity to Agile 

message: There is a fair use doctrine but it is important that the Bulter report stuff is not simply copied across and that it has been interpreted and ideally referenced with another source to avoid accusations of cpyrt problems.  Mark G 10:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright in Butler report 

message: The fact that there is an ALM entry in Wikipedia is great news. However the entry is a little too generic and not really helpful to anyone trying to obtain an informed opinion about the topic.
I'd like to take a stab at this so that it becomes an independent industry source that can be used for reference.
It would be a very bad thing if this became a billboard for vendors to ply their wares. Equally it would be far too overbearing if it became nothing more than the reguritation of analyst quotes. What is needed are comprehensive descriptions of the current thinking, best practices and practical application of ALM in the application development today.
ALM Guru 03:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One helpful addition would be to expand the the table (the section ALM Tools and Vendors) into a feature-set comparison, including, which are free-software, which are proprietary licenses, what OS the backend runs on, is the frontend browser-based or a native client app, etc, much like Comparison of Continuous Integration Software, Comparison of office suites or Comparison of web browsers.  That way, the list could be preserved, and list entries that aren't notable (based on the list of references) could be removed accordingly.  Best of all, the rest of the article could remain, free of the mention of any specific tool or vendor (except for providing NPOV examples, not favoring any one in particular, of course) and it would  actually address the article title only. 65.112.197.16 (talk) 22:30, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This entry is stale and needs modernization 

message: I can't tell from this article what ALM is.  It appears to be an umbrella term that covers the tools and methodologies used to manage the software development process. Does it refer to a particular methodology? Or do all tools, processes, and methodologies used in managing the application lifecycle qualify as ALM tools, processes and methodologies? 
Is ALM a standard? A metric? A protocol? An API? A discipline? If so, where can a reader get specific information about this standard, metric, protocol, API, or discipline? 
This article refers to "principles of ALM" but it doesn't say what they are. It also refers to "the roles in ALM" without saying what they are.
If, for example, a student were to write a report on ALM for her software sociology class, what would she need to know about it? Is ALM more than  simply an abbreviation for the self-explanatory words "application lifecycle management"? If so, what? (And if not, then what is ALM "2.0"?)
Mystified, 
RR 05:47, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is ALM, anyway? 

message: This article needs more sources (what is ALM, benefits...).
Faltenin 06:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like the only sources for this buzzword are people selling software. I'm dubious this even merits an article at all - it's just another word for software development, nothing more.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.18.249 (talk) 23:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs more sources 

message: I cleaned up the Tools and Vendors section. Quite a few of the products/companies listed there do not have their own articles, and probably don't pass notability guidelines - other pages like this sometimes use that as a requirement. Thoughts anyone? AliveFreeHappy (talk) 22:44, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for starting this. The list was Special:Contributions/GazRideGuide started by a spammer, and has grown completely out of control. We should restrict it to notable products, meaning products which have a Wikipedia article. I cleaned the list up according to this. Haakon (talk) 13:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Added MKS back in - understand that the notability dropped off with the demise of the product page in Dec 2009. I've repaired the product page and better cited within it to establish via what I understand to be reasonably reliable 3rd party sources to establish the significance of the product.  Wererooster (talk) 00:41, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

text: Ha! I should have reread the Talk first. This has already been suggested, above. So? Haakon? Others? What about it? Wererooster (talk) 14:21, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

text: There are different issues here. If there are tools that are not ALM platforms, it's reasonable to remove them. If there missing tools and they have articles, they should be added. If there are tools that don't have articles, write the article first. If you're trying to change the consensus to include non-notable products (products without articles) please be clear on that. I suspect that you should start a new section specific to that concept. If you think that there are tools that currently have articles and they should not, follow :Wikipedia:Deletion process. However, you should probably start by adhering to the article's definition of ALM provided in the article and sourced to  kovair.com. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:36, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tools and Vendors section 

message: Since the acronym stands for Application Lifecycle Management, then any ALM process or tool must facilitate the management of different aspects of an application lifecycle.  Software Engeering suggests that an application goes through different lifecycle phases.  These are requirements definition, design and coding, testing. defect and bug tracking, and change management.  All these activities needs to be under the umbrella of project management.  So, in my opinion, any process or tool that integrates all these activities is considered an ALM process or tool.  Intgration here means all information is stored in one repository to facilitate tracing information from one component to information from another componenet. Many software vendor5s try to promote their products as ALM products while they are lacking these capabilities. For an example of such process and tool, see www.rommanasoftware.com.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Magdyhanna (talk • contribs) 00:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  ALM is about integrating every aspect of an application's life cycle 

message: There is a strong misconception that ALM equates to using a single tool to manage all the phases of an application. A single tool is helpful, but it isn't necessary. Any company or person who has created an application is involved in ALM like it or not. They may have not been aware that properly managing the lifecycle of an application can reduce its costs and improve the value of the software. ALM tools make it easier for us to perform all the tasks in managing an application's lifecycle.
--Rodmoten (talk) 11:06, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  ALM doesn't require a single tool 

message: On March 1, user Timberlfake added text that says ALM is the same as AM and did not provide any sources to back up that claim. Timberlfake then added a series of paragraphs about Application Management which should not be on this page. i removed what Timberlfake added.
- Dave Johnson (talk) 13:48, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  ALM is not Application AM 

message: The section on disadvantages seem to have beem written over a list of subcomponents. Requirements are not a disadvantage.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.229.120.20 (talk) 10:22, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disadvatages?? 

message: Agreed with previous points that ALM is not specific to a methodology or a single tool but is more of a perspective on managing the lifecycle itself. Hence, any tool which forms part of an integrated suite can be considered part of ALM. 
To this extent, I have added Endevor as a Notable Product as it is currently the leading tool for managing mainframe code relating to source control, build, configuration control and release for mainframe business applications. Given that this tool has API hooks to allow integration with any other ALM tool I believe that it qualifies a mention on the ALM page. The only competitor that I am aware of for this type of tool in the mainframe sphere is Serena Software's ChangeMan ZMF which has far superior product integration and functions but currently has less market share than Endevor. It would be good to see representation from the mainframe side, along with a map of what functions are provided by software / suites.
61.88.45.5 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 06:32, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  ALM Tools 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Application lifecycle management. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.sdtimes.com/content/article.aspx?ArticleID=31952
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.microsoft.com/global/applicationplatform/en/us/RenderingAssets/Whitepapers/What%20is%20Application%20Lifecycle%20Management.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:01, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Significant overlap between the two articles AllyD (talk) 07:03, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Noting that the page is unreferenced (discounting the personal publication, which is not a notable source), so this is mostly a section redirect,  Klbrain (talk) 17:55, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with Integrated Application Lifecycle Management 

message: I have added the Software Forging article, Forge (software), in the See also list but it gets constantly deleted by Mr. Görlitz. He has deleted this reference several times.
As I understand, we can clearly define three large and overlapping concepts (top-bottom):
1. Software Project Management: Heavily administrative and supervising from a top point of view: Business requirements, planning, budget, software product management (packaging, marketing, etc.) and the such.
2. ALM: A mix between administrative and operative activities: User requirements, quality (issue tracking), configuration management, release management and the like.
3. Software Forging/Development: The most operative level: Developer requirements, design, source coding, building and the like.
I propose we vote to determine if they are related or not. If so, these articles will be listed in the See also section.
Thanks.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by George Rodney Maruri Game (talk • contribs) 01:21, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Forge is a product and what you're doing is promoting one ALM product over others. That's why I reverted.  (or at least, that's what I was implying). Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:27, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  You just jumped into conclusions without even taking time to REALLY check. I still make mistakes because I do not know all the rules. One of my last ones was about copyright, you reverted it and I took no offense. And, up to that point, I considered it a genuine concern (despite the fact you had reverted three of my most recent edits). It seems you know the rules pretty well and I congratulate for that (but do not let that turned you into some Kal-El trying to protect the world from itself). I have contributed to Wikipedia since 2005 so I am not playing games here or, promoting any organization, product or service. Only two persons have reverted my edits (Codename Lisa was the first one) in 12 years. Anyways, I hope you learned something from this (I already have). Have a good time... George Rodney Maruri Game (talk) 04:03, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  No. I did check. I'm glad you learned something from this. I learned that you're a SPA. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:12, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Your Irish insulting slang only denigrates yourself and clearly shows your true colors. This is no place to call names or offend others. I will keep contributing (very sporadically) as usual (my busy schedule always gets in my way but now it has a challenger). George Rodney Maruri Game (talk) 10:08, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Your lack of solid responses is your problem here. If you look at your edit history you can see all of your recent edits are in a single area. And I'm not Irish nor do I use any slang so stick to the point. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:39, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  ALM is related to software forging and, software project management. 

message: 100000000 people and children don't have education and jobs  why don't we all join donating clubs and donate give food to the poor😥😥😥  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kutlwano seretlo (talk • contribs) 16:03, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Children rights