In this tutorial I'll be publishing the book SOAP web service using the API manager from WSO2.
To demonstrate that it works I'll be using as usual SoapUI
The API Manager is composed of two components the Publisher and the Store.
Obviously I need to start from the publisher and create the API: you ger the WSDL endpoint from the JBoss consolle in the webservices TAB.
The API start as CREATED so I need to set into PUBLISHED state.
The API is ready to be used, so is turn of the Store where is quite easy to subscribe to the API.
The main idea is that I'm a developer that uses some of the API published on the Store and I can have different applications that make use of the API and can register to use them with different "Tier" levels that means how much requests I can issue in a given time.
Showing posts with label software. Show all posts
Showing posts with label software. Show all posts
Friday, March 08, 2013
Friday, May 22, 2009
Software liability
EU wants software to be liable like any other product.
This seems a good thing to me.
Since software is something that influence widely our life I think that is right to expect some liability from software producers.
Is absurd that people have to accept (even if they usually do not read it) something like EULA where is clearly stated that the software could well not work.
I'm paying good money for, it had better work.
This could go in the direction of introducing a higher level of professionals in code writing, something not always true, not all people employed to write code have the right skills to do it.
Obviously this apply to things you pay for and so it does not apply to open source software since is free software, you receive much more rights with the software than in a tipical proprietary software, you cannot also ask for liability.
In case of open source managed by companies like Red Hat, well this is what their customers are already paying for, they are paying for liability, they could have the option of getting the software for free, but since they need liability they pay.
So dear proprietary vendors, time is coming for you to accept your responsability: all products can heve problems a washing machine, a TV set, all heve to guarantee the customer that it works or thet it will be fixed.
With software is even more easy to give the fix, but the patch has to be produced no more "is not a bug is a feature" option around.
Software has to grow up and accept responsability.
This seems a good thing to me.
Since software is something that influence widely our life I think that is right to expect some liability from software producers.
Is absurd that people have to accept (even if they usually do not read it) something like EULA where is clearly stated that the software could well not work.
I'm paying good money for, it had better work.
This could go in the direction of introducing a higher level of professionals in code writing, something not always true, not all people employed to write code have the right skills to do it.
Obviously this apply to things you pay for and so it does not apply to open source software since is free software, you receive much more rights with the software than in a tipical proprietary software, you cannot also ask for liability.
In case of open source managed by companies like Red Hat, well this is what their customers are already paying for, they are paying for liability, they could have the option of getting the software for free, but since they need liability they pay.
So dear proprietary vendors, time is coming for you to accept your responsability: all products can heve problems a washing machine, a TV set, all heve to guarantee the customer that it works or thet it will be fixed.
With software is even more easy to give the fix, but the patch has to be produced no more "is not a bug is a feature" option around.
Software has to grow up and accept responsability.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)