Last few days I was looking with a keen interest into MS "Dublin" framework and corresponding .NET 4.0 WCF and WF amendments: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-gb/magazine/2009.01.net40.aspx
I have to say that match between that above and what Roman Kiss published on Codeproject in February 2008 https://secure.codeproject.com/KB/WF/VirtualServiceForESB.aspx is just about 90%.
Knowing that he is a connected services MVP makes me think that he might be really standing "behind" a few of "Dublin" ideas.
But then, on the other side. As he knows now about "Oslo" thing, why he is here with the custom repository and projection solution for the virtual service contracts (providing links to Oslo inside the same article)??? https://secure.codeproject.com/KB/WF/VirtualServiceRepository.aspx
Is it just an opportunity to offer a solution based on .NET 3.5 until .NET 4.0 is available?
If I were him, I would really make it to reflect "Dublin/Oslo" bits as close as possible, as I can't imagine having 90% overlapping solution with conceptually different xaml/projection schema from the MS at the end of this year! I'd be looking into how to phase out mine and port it ASAP to the live Dublin/Oslo bits.
This is my way how to bite a great guy, who Roman Kiss surely is!
Posts
1 comment:
I wondered the same however reading closer its looking like Oslo will mainly use its repositry to store M language , not sure if this will then generate the service on the fly from the specification . What if you dont want to use the whole M-Language/BPEL or even BizTalk will Oslo provide a light Virtual service ? My hunch is not - it will be highend full solution requiring a dedicated Oslo Team etc. Im betting there will be a big hole for those who want an ESB light.
He ( and Oslo) also overlap with the MSE which provide Virtualization of hosts through routing.
Post a Comment