<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Notation on Hillel Wayne</title>
    <link>https://www.hillelwayne.com/tags/notation/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Notation on Hillel Wayne</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 03 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    
	<atom:link href="https://www.hillelwayne.com/tags/notation/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    
    
    <item>
      <title>How is a Class like a Microservice?</title>
      <link>https://www.hillelwayne.com/post/box-diagrams/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 03 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://www.hillelwayne.com/post/box-diagrams/</guid>
      <description>At work we&amp;rsquo;re discussing moving some stuff to microservices. A lot of people said that they like &amp;ldquo;how microservices separate concerns while monoliths entangle them&amp;rdquo;. Others argued that &amp;ldquo;monoliths can be separated just fine with modules&amp;rdquo;, to which someone responded &amp;ldquo;it&amp;rsquo;s really hard to keep modules separate&amp;rdquo;. But &amp;ldquo;don&amp;rsquo;t you have the same problem with federated microservices?&amp;rdquo; etc etc etc.
As the discussion went on I realized that we all actually wanted the same thing out of our architecture, but we weren&amp;rsquo;t able to make that thing explicit.</description>
    </item>
    
  </channel>
</rss>