Comments on: Internal versus external events

By: Daniel Marbach

Daniel Marbach — Sun, 10 Feb 2013 09:23:00 +0000

I think this is a good blogpost. But the advice to always have an anti corruption layer is pretty critical. I think you have to consider always the additional effort vs. which partners are involved. I’ve seen companies taking the route with time lines. You get notified when V2 of an event is introduced alongside with a migration document. You get a timeline (let’s say 6 months) to migrate. After 6 months the V1 is turned off.

By: Scott Banwart's Blog › Distributed Weekly 193

Scott Banwart's Blog › Distributed Weekly 193 — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 12:25:44 +0000

[...] Internal versus external events [...]

By: Gleb Chermennov

Gleb Chermennov — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 17:37:00 +0000

This may sound as a very noob question (which it probably is) – what resources can you recommend to learn event-driven architecture from?

By: Gene Hughson

Gene Hughson — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 14:46:00 +0000

Absolutely. Even if the internal and external messages are identical, they won’t remain that way for long. Using a canonical message pattern http://genehughson.wordpress.com/2011/11/08/coping-with-change-using-the-canonical-data-model/ saves a lot of headaches. It’s also important to remember that “external” means “not deployed concurrently with your app” rather than “outside your organization”. In a corporate environment, an “external client” developer could be in the next cube over.