Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Yefim Natis is sure that ""SOA is integration"

Expand Messages
  • Rob Eamon
    Anne, I agree with your point about focus. Focus on the right level for a given situation. Focus on the right services to be built/exposed, not about tying
    Message 1 of 117 , Dec 21, 2008
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Anne,

      I agree with your point about focus. Focus on the right level for a
      given situation. Focus on the right services to be built/exposed, not
      about tying applications together.

      But I don't think that changes whether or not integration is a core
      part of SOA. SO principles are about defining services and their
      interfaces with the "outside" world. Again, I agree that integration
      isn't *the* thing to focus upon, but it is an SOA thing, IMO.

      -Rob

      --- In service-orientated-architecture@yahoogroups.com, "Anne Thomas
      Manes" <atmanes@...> wrote:
      >
      > Rob,
      >
      > If your focus is integration, then you're less likely to be thinking
      > about reducing redundancy through application consolidation.
      > Integration is driven by individual projects, i.e., taking lots of
      > small steps, but not bothering with the "thinking big" aspect. If
      > you combine SOA with a strong application portfolio management
      > effort, then I don't think the difference is anything to be
      > concerned about. The execution of specific projects tends to be
      > equivalent.
      >
      > Anne
    • Michael Poulin
      So information about governance is more important than information about service design and development? Hmmm. Not exactly, Rob, more accurately - not
      Message 117 of 117 , Jan 3, 2009
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        "So information about governance is more important than information about service design and development? Hmmm." Not exactly, Rob, more accurately - not 'about' governance but about 'how' the governance regulates development process and enforces the good practices of the development. For example, if someone uses SOAUI for SOA service testing and declares that services have been tested, the SOA Governance has to have a policy saying - no, pal, you have not tested SOA service but only SOAP communication; your job is not done yet!.. Now, the manager has to enforce such policy and follow up with the developers (based on the policy) till proper testing complete.

        ""Governance" is the latest fad word that was previously covered in large part by "management. " " - covered in the sense of enforcement, yes. However (IMO), it was up to individual manager what to enforce. As a result, the quality and architectural integrity was usually sacrificed for the sake of 'simplify', resource 'problems', 'minimal' risks and other managerial excuses for keeping the development under not technically qualified (in many cases) directions.

        As you see, when talking about SOA governance, I want to give Architects more power to influence proper solution implementations, I want Architects to allow producing the 'law' while keeping management in its regular role of managing/enforcing the laws.

        - Michael



        From: Rob Eamon <reamon@...>
        To: service-orientated-architecture@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 12:43:58 AM
        Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Yefim Natis is sure that "SOA is integration"

        --- In service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com, Michael
        Poulin <m3poulin@.. .> wrote:

        >
        > Yes, we have to stop bullsh!t ourselves hoping that "presentations
        > on services" can ever work instead of Governance.

        So information about governance is more important than information
        about service design and development? Hmmm.

        >
        > Governance is the thing which defines "what constitutes a good
        > service, how many interfaces are too many, managing the
        > relationship between interface definition and service
        > implementation, etc"

        I'm with Jeff, that's design or architecture. "Governance" is the
        latest fad word that was previously covered in large part
        by "management. "

        -Rob


      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.