After my previous post introducing Post-Architecture, I received a bunch of positive feedback, as well as enquiries from people wanting to know more. So I figured a follow-up was in order. Feel free to ask questions here as well as on Mastodon!
After my previous post introducing Post-Architecture, I received a bunch of positive feedback, as well as enquiries from people wanting to know more. So I figured a follow-up was in order. Feel free to ask questions here as well as on Mastodon!
I will read that post sometime (maybe). I wasn’t really referring to some well defined thing, but rather to something that happens naturally when complex software development is done right. Quasi-scientific: make assumptions, build the thing, test assumptions, update assumptions, rinse and repeat. The “architecture” ends up being the collected knowledge about the system which emerges from the development.
Something like that anyway. Interested to read about One and Two Way decisions.
Ah, fair :) then yeah, I’d say it’s pretty aligned with emerging architecture, just that I’m trying to define the values (and in the next post, technical guidelines based on those values) to (hopefully!) help you make the right decisions as you’re working on an emerging architecture.