3 ms·
Sure, I guess if you completely redefine the word "microservice" to something completely different from the common understanding, it makes more sense. If someo
by mwhitfield 4y ago
Sure, I guess if you completely redefine the word "microservice" to something completely different from the common understanding, it makes more sense.
If someone is writing about "microservices," they are generally talking about the situation where those APIs and team boundaries are exclusively (or at least primarily) composed of separate applications communicating over the network. Not what you're talking about.
- randomdata 4y agoWhat's the common understanding? I've honestly never heard of any other definition. The article shares the same definition, at least.
- mwhitfield 4y ago> the situation where those APIs and team boundaries are exclusively (or at least primarily) composed of separate applications communicating over the network
- randomdata 4y agoAre you, perhaps, not familiar with Conway's Law?
- JAlexoid 4y agoConway's law doesn't apply to microservice architecture. Microservice architecture splits the functionality farther, than Conway's law talks about. When a single team owns 4-5 microservices - that's beyond Conway's law.
- randomdata 4y agoIt is people who provide service. If the (micro)service produces 4-5 products as part of the service they provide, that's not beyond Conway's Law at all.
- JAlexoid 4y agoConsidering that you've been engaging in strawman arguments this whole thread, I bow out of this discussion.
- randomdata 4y agoIt is always curious when someone writes that they are bowing out of a discussion, as if they don't realize that no longer replying conveys the exact same information. Was there an additional takeaway here that I missed?