Q: ChaRM vs QGate * Comparison and Relationship of ChaRM and Quality Gate

[Former Member]

Comparison and Relationship between ChaRM (Change Request Management) and QGate (Quality Gate Management)

Dear ChaRM* and QGate* specialists,

Unfortunately I was so fare not able to really work out the relationship between ChaRM and QGate just from the documentation.

Maybe any of you can provide a comparison, and answer some of my questions:

a) can ChaRM and QGate co-exist on the same SolMan (yes)?

b) can both ChaRM and QGate be used for the same SolMan projects?

c) can one single transport request be assigned both to ChaRM and a QGate project?

d) would such a transport be created out of ChaRM or out of QGate?

e) as both ChaRM and QGate can trigger the (physical) transports/imports, which one would take control in a mixed environment?

f) how is the relationship getween the ChaRM cycle phase and the QGate phase?

Is there a process to keep this in sync?

Is there a double-check?

g) what kind of approvals are in place when both ChaRM and QGate are in use?

can there be some conflicts?

are there any automatic approvals in the one or other direction?

h) are there any outstanding capabilities that only ChaRM provides?

e.g. cross-system object locking, critical objects?

j) are there any outstanding capabilities that only QGate provides?

k) how would a feature comparison or a pro/con matrix look for ChaRM and QGate?

Many thanks,

Peter

*ChaRM: Change Request Management

*QGate: Quality Gate Management

[TomCenens · Accepted solution]

Hello Peter

I would suggest you check the documentation on both on SAP Service Marketplace.

[http://service.sap.com/changecontrol]

You can see quality gate management as a light version of change request management. Quality gate management was made by SAP after some customers gave feedback that change request management offers too much (lots of functionality, need for multiple end-users to perform certain roles and so on).

Both are actually based on functionality that has always been there and a lot of it can be reproduced by manually setting/changing expert settings (customizing etc) of TMS.

It wouldn't make sense to mix both for a single TMS project. Either you go for the light version, quality gate management where the emphasis lies on the phase you are in (ability to create transports for the project, release them etc yes no) or you go for change request management where the phases are also there but a lot of addional options exist.

Change request management can do much more, for example retrofit functionality can be used for complex landscapes to retrofit changes into a another system landscape line).

If you want to have all functionality and most extensive set of features, you should go for change request management. If you want a more controlled environment compared to regular TMS flow but you want to keep it simple, go for quality gate management.

I heard SAP has plans to put both together and offer the functionality (choice of extensive or simple control) in one tool in the upcoming SAP Solution Manager 7.1

Kind regards

Tom

[Former Member]

Very handy, thank you.