On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 19:58, Hitoshi Ozawa <[email protected]> wrote: > However, there is a > concern that a failed project might shed a bad image on SOA or even > worse, if all the budget was used to buy and develop something that is > totally unusable and was brushed beneath the desk at the dark corner > of the room. :-)
Sure, but I suspect that's more due to thinking SOA as a technology or a "right" answer or a set of methods or something you can wrap up in a box and sell. Once you get into the "SOA as a set of principles, goals and philosophies" then in reality, SOA can't fail as a unit or a connection point or a common signifier. Anne is right about "SOA is dead, long live something else that is SOA but doesn't have those connotations", but the trick is what we're supposed to say and call it now. I still call it SOA, and then point out some technologies I use doing it, and people see the disjoint without me having to point it out, but then, I'm not *selling* SOA so I guess my approach is different from, say, a consultant. > Oh, BTW. somebody found my server, which housed my first attempt at > ESB, in a forgotten cabinet at the back of the room today. I was > pretty certain that nobody would find it before I retire. So the world > goes. lol So now they'll hunt you down, drag you out of retirement and make you pay for your sins? :) Regards, Alex -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps ------------------------------------------ http://shelter.nu/blog/ --------
