and maintainer of:
So yesterday we had a technical meeting with the technology dep., a 3rd. party vendor and finally me and our project manager representing Online Marketing.
We discussed the different scenarios and the proposals and project in general.
My architectural proposal was agreed to be the right solution, but we would be going for
So the whole meeting was a waste of time, the asnwer to all my questions was; It has been decided higher up...
At the same time it seems as if the online team is the only team that have made an analysis of what the project scope is about - we have a really rough estimate made by me, but not matter how much I argued for choosing the right solution, it did not help.
I attempted to look at it from a project perspective and bu adding up the number of services we already had, which just needed to be tested instead of being reimplemented in Java to live side by side with our Perl services.
Ok, to recap.
The whole deal is that we want to integrate a new product, which should have some services. About 70% of the functionality already exists for other products and would only require little work and perhaps a few adjustments to work with the new product. But instead they want to make an external website solution, which should be
iframed into our web site.
So we will loose control, the services will not integrate to with our existing framework and we will have to make weird hacks to get AAA working and they should additionally deliver a new CMS to control the external website.
So all in all the 3rd. party should deliver:
I suggested that we ported the 70% of services and let the 3rd. party utilize our fine protocol, so they could avoid:
And the learning curve of the protocol and service integration would not threaten the deadline and the project as a whole. We could utilize existing tools and processes.
I it the first time I experience such constraints on my work and I do not like it.
because we go for
iframes, since it has been decided.
I am considering writing the topmost manager.