ccs specs - Forum - OpenEdge General - Progress Community
 Forum

ccs specs

This question is not answered

Heard a rumour that the ccs specs are published. Now that the nda has been silently (!) dropped there's no restriction to publish and discuss them here now is there? ;-) In how far an eventual evolution to a micro services architecture (http://martinfowler.com/articles/microservices.html)  will be kept in mind?

  I would be happy with a small brms included. Not an interface to that expensive and vast corticon, just a small one written in abl. Easy integration possibilities with an os solution like http://openl-tablets.org/documentation/apologia would be nice. Furthermore dynamic catalog generation for datasets with more than one table. I could use that for batchmode insert of orders f.e. (so not first save an order and afterwards save orderlines one by one). Mailed this link before with a demo: http://eurekaaddons.co.uk/products/web-so-for-sage-200/   nice eh?

--
Kind regards,
 
Stefan Houtzager
 
Houtzager ICT consultancy & development
 
www.linkedin.com/in/stefanhoutzager
 
All Replies
  • We do use the term Community Review Draft in the charter document. However, you are correct it is not formally defined. We should correct that in a future revision the Charter Document.

    Let me see if I can clarify where we are with this specification:

    The Architecture Specification is now in the "Community Review Period". This means that the specification submitted by the spec. team has been reviewed by the steering committee to ensure it meets the goals of the Specification Proposal and has been "approved" to go through a review period by the entire community.

  • The group is not closed you are welcome to join. We have reduced the burden of joining by removing the NDA and will continue to seek ways to lower the effort required to join.

  • Hi Stefan

    Can you possibly elaborate on your reservations for joining CCS?

    Sunil.

  • For me there are questions I don't actually have an answer to.

  • Any specific question, James?

    Architect of the SmartComponent Library and WinKit

    Consultingwerk Ltd.

  • Hi Sunil,

    What is not clear? I don't like to repeat myself, but I would just like things to be really open, so that everyone can take notice of what is done and give input. I think f.e. Tom Bascom has the same mindset, maybe he can make it clear personally to you? Really, it is not that difficult. ;-)

    Stefan.

  • Not to put words in James' mouth but I suspect he is referring to the 20 or so mandatory questions regrading things like his company's total revenue etc.

    My impression of James is that he is a stickler for following rules.  When a form says that something is mandatory he takes it a bit more seriously than some people might.

    --
    Tom Bascom
    tom@wss.com

  • Removing the NDA is an excellent step forward.  I heartily endorse that.  Thank-you!

    The 20 or so mandatory questions to get registered remain an imposing barrier to easy participation.  I managed to stick with it and get through them but not everyone will be so flexible.

    --
    Tom Bascom
    tom@wss.com

  • Thanks Tom . We are working on eliminating some of the mandatory questions on registrations to make the process simpler.

    Stefan - To review or contribute to CCS, you would need to sign-up to CCS. At this point, the read and contribute roles aren't different (with different contracts) and it is all part of single CCS agreement. Thanks for your input.

  • I'm in a bit of a unique position at the moment being between jobs. I can't truthfully answer questions about my employer etc. But to be honest I'm not sure I want to give that detailed information about my employer either. Not sure either for old or the new would be too happy with that information when I'm joining the group for personal reasons. If that makes sense.

  • ChUIMonster

    Not to put words in James' mouth but I suspect he is referring to the 20 or so mandatory questions regrading things like his company's total revenue etc.

    My impression of James is that he is a stickler for following rules.  When a form says that something is mandatory he takes it a bit more seriously than some people might.

    Thanks Tom - explained perfectly! :)

  • I've said that at the last pug challenge event and although haven't got kick off the room the long list of silly questions remained there after that NDA removal, one would thought reducing or even removing that sales/marketing information retrieval form should have been easier than lifting the NDA :)

    That made me stop couple of time before but then went away and as Tom said fill in the form the best I've could, must admit gibberish over used, still that got myself in so you should relax your rules and give it a try.

    On the other hand making it difficult to join goes against attracting community involvement in the first place, you should probably try to send in-person invites to some of the known community contributors out there... after all you're inviting peoples to join an effort on pro-bono basis ;)

  • Thanks Marian. I'll try and fill in as much as I can :)

  • Would be good to take broad view stories like www.richardrodger.com/monolithic-nodejs into account while writing specs.

    "Our current approaches, from waterfall to agile, serve simply to enable monolithic systems. They enable us to build bigger and add more complexity. Even unit testing is an enabler. You thought unit testing was the good guy? It’s not. If you do it properly, it just lets you build bigger, not smarter." And a lot more. This is a readable, entertaining story.

    It's about node.js: "the good parts" also (but misses a critical part). And on the microservices I named in the message starting this thread..

    As bonus read http://blog.plataformatec.com.br/2015/06/elixir-in-times-of-microservices/ on microservices, and http://mmikowski.github.io/json-pure/ on restful api's.

      Moreover I hope you leave agile bullshit out (see above + this bonus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvks70PD0Rs  :-). 

    --

    Kind regards,

    Stefan Houtzager

    Houtzager ICT consultancy & development

    www.linkedin.com/in/stefanhoutzager

  • Thanks for your feedback Stefan. Interesting posts and videos. What methodology is used to the develop the specs. is left up to the specification teams. Nothing mandates Agile.