My article about Self-Contained Systems @scsarchitecture at @JAXenterCOM is online: jaxenter.com/self-contained-…
1
18
31
Well explained. So, the SCSs are logical. Are they different to a SOA service as defined by @UdiDahan? @JAXenterCOM @scsarchitecture
1
1
I discussed this with @UdiDahan a long time ago – while there are lots of similarities, UI integration is different
1
OK. Care to explain? In his model, UI composition is common. SCS use REST mainly? @ewolff @UdiDahan
2
@scsarchitecture relies on browser-based integration, independent of any particular client-side app technology
1
IMO there are UI composition differences, but the rest is very similar
2
I simple love the name: self contained system. What a perfect metaphor!
1
1
it IS a good name. More saying than service
2
Only problem is that "system" implies a unit of deployment, not logic @jeppec @Cairolali @stilkov @trondhjort @ewolff @scsarchitecture
4
1
Replying to @UdiDahan @jeppec @Cairolali @trondhjort @ewolff @scsarchitecture
That’s the main point :) Units of deployment as architecture boundaries

Nov 30, 2016 · 7:20 PM UTC

2
Replying to @stilkov
But, but... :) Isn't the SCS boundary logical? Not deployment @UdiDahan @jeppec @Cairolali @ewolff
2
Microservices and SCSs don’t treat deployment boundaries as an implementation detail.
2
more replies
Replying to @stilkov @UdiDahan @Cairolali @trondhjort @ewolff @scsarchitecture
I thought SCS implied logical boundary with impl e.g. being microservices