[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [sca-assembly] SCA Eventing Pub/Sub Contribution FAQ
|
Martin et al., Frankly, I’ve been tracking this thread for a while
and I don’t get all the fuss around trying to add event processing
capability to a services paradigm programming model. With the exception
of insuring that the SCA programming model can support multiple message
exchange patterns (MEPs) for service invocation and alternative response (whether
it be support for asynchronous queuing, request/response, request/callback,
request/polling, batch processing, or, more to the point, “event-driven”
pub/sub), why are we attempting to add support in SCA for the event processing
paradigm in general? It’s not a service-oriented paradigm; in other
words, it is not capability- or functionally-driven at its core. It would seem to me that we would only need to insure that
that SCA-Assembly spec support the notion that some entity that, upon occurrence
of certain events of interest, triggers the invocation of a service. In
that way, such an entity would simply be another SCA client and communication between
the consumer/client and provider entity (service) could be any of the supported
MEPs. So my point is, why not add an entry to the eventing pub/sub
FAQ list that questions the support for event processing at all? This is
in contrast to the current list of FAQs, which focus on the assumption that
such support is required and what needs to be changed in the SCA programming
model to support it. As an aside, I would like to participate in your Wed
discussions on this topic but it conflicts with another TC meeting I have.
I’ll do my best to follow the thread and respond accordingly. Regards… - Jeff E., NASA/JPL |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]