Wednesday, July 06, 2005

While Tech-ed Europe is on its way it becomes clear to me that a lot of people are currently re-thinking how to implement their architectural requirements. A lot of people that I spoke are (of course) evaluating Visual Studio 2005 Beta 2, Indigo Beta 1 and WSE 3.0 CTP. Some of them (like me) are currently using some sort of a framework or toolset to support their architectural and service oriented needs.

 

During the talks I had with some people one of the issues that cam up was:  do we need another framework on top of .NET 2.0, Indigo and WS-*? And after that: Is the guidance that we are using now (for the current technology) still valid when all the new stuff is available? And if not, what do we need and when! In my opinion all interesting issues that sooner or later become very valid questions for a lot of us.

 

Some of the people I spoke, planned to simply migrate their current framework to .NET 2.0 when that is available. This wouldn’t be my preferred strategy. I think there is a relatively big change that simply migrating existing stuff doesn’t use the full power of the new technology. On the other hand, if it takes very little effort to migrate it can be a valid option.

 

Others thought that simply wait for Indigo to ship is the best option. In the meantime try to decide what you need (framework, guidance, etc.) and try to get that ready as soon as possible. For new systems in the timeframe between .NET 2.0 arrival and Indigo, simply use .NET 2.0 and if needed use WSE 3.0 to solve the WS-* issues.

 

In my current set of frameworks, guidance, etc. there is special attention for “separating the cross cutting concerns from the actual business logic” and separating the service interface from the service implementation. This is enforced by using a framework. I’ am still thinking how to solve these issues in the new (.NET 2.0, Indigo) world. For separating the service interface from the service implementation I think you don’t really need the help of a framework. This is just a pattern that you can apply.

A little different might be solving the “separating the cross cutting concerns from the business logic issue”. I have some ideas about this but I’ am not sure yet. Unfortunately I haven’t met any people here at Tech-Ed that have some ideas about this, but I’ am sure they must be around here somewhere. Have any ideas about this and like to have a discussion? Let me know!!

7/6/2005 7:49:00 PM UTC
I think it was Clemens who talked about seperating the interface from the implementation in his talk this morning. The samples he posted online (http://weblogs.asp.net/pgielens/archive/2005/07/06/418117.aspx) doesn't include the code he showed in his demo. Perhaps you should join us for lunch tomorrow.
8/14/2005 8:42:08 PM UTC
Clemens took that from EDRA when he was asked to review it. EDRA has been there for a long while but because it does not have the blessing of indigo and biztalk it was never released to MSDN althoug beein the most popular project in gotdotnet.\
Of all the frameworks that i've seen arround it is the only one that cleanly migrates to Indigo with binary compatibility beacuse they not only separated interface from implenentation but the separated the interface from the transport.
Of course EDRA sltuions are rather verbose in the boundary "Transport + Interface" but that is beacuse of .NET 1.1 you will see that when using a indigo transport this beacomes lighter.
Why don't you give it a look at http://www.southworks.net/edra/
Name
E-mail
Home page

Comment (HTML not allowed)  

Enter the code shown (prevents robots):