[mwhitfield]

Sure, I guess if you completely redefine the word "microservice" to something completely different from the common understanding, it makes more sense.

If someone is writing about "microservices," they are generally talking about the situation where those APIs and team boundaries are exclusively (or at least primarily) composed of separate applications communicating over the network. Not what you're talking about.

[randomdata]

What's the common understanding? I've honestly never heard of any other definition. The article shares the same definition, at least.

[mwhitfield]

> the situation where those APIs and team boundaries are exclusively (or at least primarily) composed of separate applications communicating over the network

[randomdata]

Are you, perhaps, not familiar with Conway's Law?

[JAlexoid]

Considering that you've been engaging in strawman arguments this whole thread, I bow out of this discussion.

[randomdata]

It is always curious when someone writes that they are bowing out of a discussion, as if they don't realize that no longer replying conveys the exact same information. Was there an additional takeaway here that I missed?

[JAlexoid]

Conway's law doesn't apply to microservice architecture.

Microservice architecture splits the functionality farther, than Conway's law talks about. When a single team owns 4-5 microservices - that's beyond Conway's law.

[randomdata]

It is people who provide service. If the (micro)service produces 4-5 products as part of the service they provide, that's not beyond Conway's Law at all.