10 tips on how to prevent business value risk
One category of risk that project teams need to ensure they address is business value failure – delivering a product that fails to provide value for the business investor.
Presentation
The content has been bookmarked!
There was an error bookmarking this content! Please retry.
Recorded at:
Rod Johnson: Are we there yet?
Presented by
Rod Johnson
on
May 31, 2007
Length 00:59:32
How would you like to view the presentation?
In case you are having issues watching this video, please follow these simple steps to help us investigate the issue:
1. Right click on the video player and select Copy log
2. Paste the copied information in an email to video-issue@infoq.com (clicking this link will fill in the default details in most email clients).
Note: in case your email client hasn't automatically picked up the email subject, please include in your email the URL of the video too.
3. Done.
We will investigate the issue and get back to you as soon as possible. Thanks for helping us improve our site!
1. Right click on the video player and select Copy log
2. Paste the copied information in an email to video-issue@infoq.com (clicking this link will fill in the default details in most email clients).
Note: in case your email client hasn't automatically picked up the email subject, please include in your email the URL of the video too.
3. Done.
We will investigate the issue and get back to you as soon as possible. Thanks for helping us improve our site!
Summary
We've come a long way from the first versions of J2EE. We've learned to avoid invasive programming models, we've developed a rich set of frameworks and APIs, we know how to develop apps based around simple objects. Are we there yet? Most of us would answer no. If we're not there yet, then where are we headed next? Spring founder Rod Johnson explores this issue. Recorded at JAOO Sept 2006.
Bio
Rod is the father of Spring. The Spring Framework open source project began in February 2003, based on the Interface21 framework published with Rod's best-selling Expert One-on-One J2EE Design and Development. Rod is one of the world's leading authorities on Java and J2EE development.
About the conference
JAOO is the premier European developer conference on software technology, methods and best practices. The conference presents in-depth presentations and tutorials by researchers, engineers and trend-setters in software engineering and technology.
We've come a long way from the first versions of J2EE. We've learned to avoid invasive programming models, we've developed a rich set of frameworks and APIs, we know how to develop apps based around simple objects. Are we there yet? Most of us would answer no. If we're not there yet, then where are we headed next? Spring founder Rod Johnson explores this issue. Recorded at JAOO Sept 2006.
Bio
Rod is the father of Spring. The Spring Framework open source project began in February 2003, based on the Interface21 framework published with Rod's best-selling Expert One-on-One J2EE Design and Development. Rod is one of the world's leading authorities on Java and J2EE development.
About the conference
JAOO is the premier European developer conference on software technology, methods and best practices. The conference presents in-depth presentations and tutorials by researchers, engineers and trend-setters in software engineering and technology.
RelatedVendorContent
Getting Started with Stratos - an Open Source Cloud Platform
Improve Java Garbage Collection, Runtime Execution, and JVM visibility with Zing
Using Drools? See what you're missing! Get the Power of Drools with the Assurance of Red Hat
Circular dependencies?
by
Oliver Gierke
Posted
Re: Circular dependencies?
by
Sato Tadayosi
Posted
Great stuff. Let's go further.
by
Eelco Hillenius
Posted
Deep trouble
by
John Harby
Posted
Good summary
by
Rickard Öberg
Posted
-
Nice one again, injecting domain model classes leads to circular dependencies between service layer and domain layer in my opinion. Consider following packages
foo.bar.pethealth.domain
foo.bar.pethealth.service
foo.bar.pethealth.service.impl
domain contains all domain classes as Vet, Pet a.s.o., service contains interfaces exposed to clients and service.impl contains the actual implementations. So I am forced not to have a domain object in the IdentityTagRegistrationService interface to not create a circular dependency.
Okay, this question lead to the question if its reasonable to expose domain objects to service clients, but for some applications it would be overhead to create DTOs for that purpose 'cause you simply would copy most properties and getters and setters from the domain object to the DTO class and thus duplicate code and create (unnecessary) complexity. All the DTO would be quite anemic, too.
Perhaps in the next lower layer the problem becomes more obvious. What if I need to save objects in the logic, or retrieve further objects? DAO interfaces obviously have to expose domain objects. If I had a dependency to the DAO in the domain object then, the circle s perfect.
Any thoughts on that?
Regards
Ollie -
Oliver,
domain contains all domain classes as Vet, Pet a.s.o., service contains interfaces exposed to clients and service.impl contains the actual implementations. So I am forced not to have a domain object in the IdentityTagRegistrationService interface to not create a circular dependency.
If we recognize IdentityTagRegistrationService as a "Service" in the DDD sense, it is also a domain element so no circular dependency occurs. (Quite confusing, but Service in DDD is not the same as services of Martin Fowler's Service Layer.) Anyway, I agree that IdentityTagRegistrationService is not a good name for explaining architecture of the sample app.
Perhaps in the next lower layer the problem becomes more obvious. What if I need to save objects in the logic, or retrieve further objects? DAO interfaces obviously have to expose domain objects. If I had a dependency to the DAO in the domain object then, the circle s perfect.
Again, if you include DAO interfaces into domain packages and separate them from DAO implementations in dao package, circular dependencies disappear. This technique is Separated Interface pattern. In this case, DAO interfaces can be regarded as "Repository" of DDD and repositories are residents of domain model in their own rights.
SATO, Tadayosi
www.ouobpo.org -
That was a good presentation, and indeed how much better does the Java landscape look today. I do hope that Rod and friends someday will take up the defense for OOP in web applications (additionaly with AOP if you want). Clear responsibilies. Encapsulation. All that good stuff should have a place in the web tier like it has in the rest of your software.
-
Check out this link:
www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/feature_a...
Looks like we've only 40 years worth of oil left. What do we do when we run out? -
This was an excellent presentation, that I hope many many people will watch. I wholeheartedly agree with the background description and problem summary, and with the ideas of moving more towards an object-oriented domain model. We have been using this approach in SiteVision for a long time, with AOP as the enabling technology, and have found it to be a good way to avoid the pitfalls Rod outlines.
That being said, I think there are better ways to solve this than to use AOP. But, one step at a time. First everyone must understand the absolutely horriffic situation we are in today, as described in the presentation.
5 comments
Watch Thread Reply