Software-Architecture Revolution is the process of making profound, large-scale changes to the fundamental structures of software systems to improve its attributes, such as availability, scalability, and maintainability, or to enable new requirements that are incompatible with the current capabilities. Architectural revolution demands substantial effort from the organization and needs effective leadership to be successful. This talk draws from practical experiences (patterns) to improve the effectiveness of architectural revolution initiatives.

Target Audience: Architects, Managers, Project Leaders, Coaches, Developers, Product Owners, Decision Makers
Prerequisites: Leadership, Architecture, Project Management, Working with Teams, Agile mindset
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
Pressure to adapt to and shape the market requires agile organizations to add new features, accommodate new interactions, and have new teams work on adapting the software. Sometimes a straightforward software architecture that starts out small when communication is easy can support guided, incremental architectural changes and can gradually evolve with its environment, remaining fit for its purposes. Other times it is not so simple: the initial software architecture can be poorly suited for supporting required changes, or the accumulation of suboptimal architectural decisions (also known as architectural technical debt) can be too severe; in either case, the architecture needs an extensive revision; especially for the organization to remain agile and adapt to the changing market.
Software architecture revolution can be defined as the process of making profound, large-scale changes to the fundamental structures of a software system to improve its attributes, such as availability, scalability, and maintainability, or to enable new requirements that are incompatible with the current capabilities. Architectural revolution usually demands substantial effort from the organization and thus depends on effective leadership to be successful. However, while there is plenty of research on the technical aspects of any architectural transformation, not much is available from the leadership perspective. The role of managers and other leaders include championing the revolution initiative, prioritizing activities, negotiating the allocation of people and resources, evaluating results, taking corrective actions, and reporting achievements. This talk draws from practical experiences to describe patterns to improve the effectiveness of architectural revolution initiatives.

In this session we will walk through various techniques to significantly reduce the resource consumption of regular Spring Boot applications, including using Spring AOT for regular Spring apps, compiling Spring Boot apps to native images (using GraalVM), and using CRaC for instant startup (for scale-to-zero scenarios). We will compare the different approaches, discuss pros and cons for each technology, and share concrete numbers from real-world applications to give the audience an idea of what can be achieved using these technologies.

Target Audience: Developers, Architects
Prerequisites: Basic Spring Boot knowledge required
Level: Advanced

Mehr Inhalte dieses Speakers? Schaut doch mal bei sigs.de vorbei: https://www.sigs.de/autor/martin.lippert

User-centred design is one of the default modes of teams working with software, but the consequences are often unsustainable in a densely networked world as we privilege users over all other stakeholders and systems. How might teams approach building products, services and organisations from a more sustainable standpoint than 'user-centricity'? This talk looks at how the techniques of game design, community development, platform operations and security practices can support a practice focused on hyperobjects for multi-centric design.

Target Audience: Leaders, Builders, Architects, Designers, Community Members
Prerequisites: No previous knowledge, only enthusiasm for systems, building things and design
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
The key feature of a 'tragedy' is when everybody does the right thing but it goes wrong anyway. The aim of this session will be to look at why user-centred design goes wrong even if everyone's intentions are pure. This talk (gently!) brings in ideas from feminism, design thinkers, political science and anthropology to focus on very practical, grounded approaches to sustainable design in software teams. We'll look at how building things and designing organisations that have increased levels of friction can improve users' experience and how 'seamless' design can lead to disempowerment. And we'll also draw on the speaker's practical experience of building products used by millions of citizens as part of the UK's digital transformation. By the end of the session we'll have a sense of what might replace the shallow seamlessness of 'user-centred' design — a multi-centric, transcendental design aimed at manufacturing enthusiastic consent.

This is not about what an "Agile Architecture" could be. It is about the view from the opposite direction:
How can architecture work look like in order to act as an enabler to work in the spirit of the Manifesto for Agile Software Development?
There are answers to questions like.
•    Why is architecture documentation so rarely read?
•    How much technology focus is helpful and why?
•    What knowledge needs to be built by yourself in the first place?
•    What does programming have to do with architecture?
And above all: what does it mean in practice?

Target Audience: (Senior) Software Developers, Architects, Knowledge-Managers
Prerequisites: Curiosity for why architecture work is still so difficult.
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
This is not about the question "How does a good architecture emerge in an 'Agile environment'". Nor is it about whether hexagonal, clean or onion architectures are good for ‘agile projects’.
Rather, it is about the view from the opposite direction:
What should architecture work look like in practice to act as an enabler for working in the way of the Manifesto for Agile Software Development?
Covering (at least) these points:

• Being read is more important than writing or: The worm must taste good to the fish, not to the angler.
• Concepts are more important than technologies or: Kafka is not a business interface
• Parnas and Dijksta are more important than reddit/r/docker or: "Have we reinvented the wheel yet this year?"
• Software crafting is an architecture issue or: Riding a bike is only easy if you've learned how to do it

We look at what is actually meant by this in detail, and how we can arrive at "good practices" for the daily work.

Come and hear the story of a company that is on the journey from the old monolithic, on-premise, waterfall world to the new modular, agile, domain-driven, multi-tenant, cloud-based microservices world. The challenges come from different directions: both technical and organizational aspects have to be mastered. The domain has to be understood, so that the system can be structured right. The big bang has to be avoided.
In this talk we will look at how our “fictional” company has struggled with and finally overcome those challenges.

Target Audience: Architects, Developers, Project Leaders, Managers
Prerequisites: Programming Experience
Level: Advanced

Mehr Inhalte dieses Speakers? Schaut doch mal bei sigs.de vorbei: https://www.sigs.de/autor/henning.schwentner

As more organizations are moving to the cloud, cloud architectures are getting more sophisticated by having a kind of technology diversity. This includes for example container orchestrators, database services, networking components & virtual machines.
When it comes to security, observability on this diversity is paramount. The main question here is, do you really perceive when your app landscape is under attack?
In this session, you'll have the opportunity to see various attack vectors & ways to mitigate them using different technologies.

Target Audience: Architects, Developers, Software Engineers
Prerequisites: Basic cloud & security knowledge
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
Come and watch a live attack on a real-world based cloud architecture and see the attacker scan web applications and start lateral movement with the goal of exfiltrating data. Furthermore, become a part of the blue-team, defending and securing the architecture with modern open source tools.

Microfrontends are a popular concept for development in an enterprise project, where a large number of teams want to work independently.
But what is the cost achieving run-time integration and independent framework versions?
JS frameworks intended to build SPAs have solved many problems like deep-linking between pages without reloading the application.
This talk will give you some real life experience which challenges are to be considered using different integration patterns, using webcomponents, module federation and "classic" libraries.

Target Audience: Architects, Developers, Project Managers
Prerequisites: Basic knowledge of Angular or other JS SPA Frameworks
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
How often do project managers wish for a microfrontend architecture? Contrary to microservices in the backend, microfrontends are not always the recommended future choice.
You might have to solve a lot of problems, that have already been solved in frameworks like Angular or React.
If we start separating UI elements in encapsulated webcomponents, we risk a lot of effort re-creating capabilities like deeplinking (routing) or event handling across components.
Or: we need to add additional frameworks that solve the challenges of navigation, context transfer and layouting.
The talk provides an overview, what default architecture patterns Angular provides and how to mitigate problems that might come with classical architectures or a monorepo.
The talk will mention use cases, when the usage of microfrontends is feasible and recommended. It will also provide workarounds if a microfrontend architecture is needed.

Expanding Horizons, the motto of OOP 2024, invites exciting thoughts about the future of software engineering. What will a developer's working day look like in 2034? What environments, tools, and practices will they use to create, test, deploy, and operate software? What will our daily lives look like in a digitalized world in 2034? What types of software systems will be everywhere? What systems will we use at work? What architectures and technologies do these systems rely on? Frank and Kevlin look into the future.

Target Audience: Anyone curious about the future of software engineering
Prerequisites: Interest and sound knowledge in software engineering, architecture and development
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
Expanding Horizons, the motto of OOP 2024, invites exciting thoughts about the future of software engineering. What will a developer's working day look like in 2034? What environments, tools, and practices will they use to create, test, deploy, and operate software? What will our daily lives look like in a digitalized world in 2034? What types of software systems will be everywhere? What systems will we use at work? What architectures and technologies do these systems rely on?
The view is not always clear, but we can look at past and present trends to ask questions and make some forecasts. How will AI affect the daily work of developers, but also everyone else's work? Digitalization is affecting everyone from government to individual — how far will it have taken us by 2034? The last couple of years have seen a lot of media around cryptocurrency, Web3 and the Metaverse, but to what extent will these hopes and hypes actually have affected software development and software usage? What new trends can we expect to see in software architecture, programming languages and workplace culture?
Join Frank and Kevlin as they look into the future, a decade from now.

In this session, two co-creators of Org Topologies™, Alexey Krivitsky and Roland Flemm, will share a method to design, assess and improve your organizational ecosystem.
They will do that by familiarizing you with a set of organizational archetypes that are easy to spot. Hopefully, you will have much better clarity on which organization ecosystem you want to build and which behaviors you expect it to exhibit.
You shall be able to take this tool home and use it as a map in your ongoing, never-ending transformation journey toward agility.

Target Audience: Decision Makers, Transformation Team Members, Coaches, Leadership
Prerequisites: Challenges with scaling agility
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
The legacy of the original lightweight barely sufficient Agile ideas (namely XP and Scrum) has been impeded by the difficulties of applying them beyond a single team without losing the key principles and the promised gains.
Over the last decade, that challenge has led to a rose in heavy-weight methods, especially SAFe™, which has become a go-to place for "everything agile". It provides the user with a profound variety of specific tools and techniques for "scaling agile". Many enterprises are on the path of "rolling out" these ideas by the book with the help of trained coaches. But will we eventually get the promised gains of agility once we fulfill the requirements of the framework in our enterprise? Is such a prescriptive approach agile itself? And more importantly: will we own the change and know how to keep improving beyond the rule book?
In recent years, we have seen the emergence of other methods: framework-agnostic org design DIY toolboxes. In this family of modern ideas, Team Topologies™ and unFix™ stand out from the crowd. Their approach is to offer us a "lunch buffet" to pick structures and processes that suit our situation. It is a flexible approach with a lot of freedom of choice. It offers a fresh path for some of us trying to avoid the burden of frameworks. But the freedom of freely picking org elements implies that we possess a clear bigger picture and won't get lost in the night-gritty details of the puzzle pieces. As leaders, managers, and coaches, how fluent are we in org design, queuing theory, and systems thinking? How can we be confident that we won't lose the plot by trying to put together those puzzle pieces? And more importantly: will we get long-term gains, or will we inflict more unforeseen problems by focusing too much on the small building blocks rather than the whole system?
Difficult questions. Org Topologies™ doesn't have all of them answered for us. But being a framework-agnostic approach for designing agile ecosystems where business and technology would work as one, it can provide us with a solid basis on which all other decisions can be grounded. Essentially, Org Topologies™ moves us from the dualism of frameworks vs. DIY methods into the realm of ecosystems - a unity of interdependent organizational parts that together exhibit well-recognized behaviors.
In this session, two co-creators of Org Topologies™, Alexey Krivitsky and Roland Flemm, will share a method to design, assess and improve your organizational ecosystem. They will do that by familiarizing you with a set of organizational archetypes that are easy to spot in any organization. Hopefully, by the end of the talk, you will have much better clarity on which organization ecosystem you want to build and which behaviors you expect it to exhibit. Eventually, you shall be able to take this tool home and use it with your leadership group as a map in your ongoing, never-ending transformation journey toward agility.

Many developers evoke technical debt to explain the misfortunes and troubles of their codebase and delivery. While unmanaged technical debt weighs down an architecture and exerts drag on its schedule, it is more often an effect than a cause. In this talk, we will look at what is and is not meant by technical debt with a view to properly attributing the root and recurring cause as technical neglect than technical debt. Without seeing technical neglect for what it is, we will continue to misattribute our problems to an effect rather than a cause.

Target Audience: Developers, Architects, Technical Managers
Prerequisites: Responsibility for software development, whether implementing it, guiding it or managing it
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
Many developers evoke the mischievous spirit and day-to-day burden of technical debt to explain the misfortunes and troubles of their codebase and delivery. While unmanaged technical debt weighs down an architecture and exerts drag on its schedule, it is more often an effect than a cause. In this talk, we will look at what is and is not meant by technical debt — and other metaphors — with a view to properly attributing the root and recurring cause as technical neglect than technical debt. Without seeing technical neglect for what it is, we will continue to misattribute our problems to an effect rather than a cause.

Xin has lived and breathed DDD for more than a decade. Drawing on her experiences, Xin makes a case for DDD’s rising relevance in a post-modern world, where aging companies struggle with aging software, while adding new software and complexity to their IT portfolio. With good attractor effect DDD is evolving from a software-centric design discipline to a multi-dimensional toolbox. Join Xin to reflect together on, how DDD can help us sustain meaning and productivity in a reality of vast sociotechnical complexity and constant change.

Target Audience: Software Professionals, Architects, Leaders, Agile Practitioners, Change Agents, Facilitators
Prerequisites: Basic DDD understanding; Prior DDD experience is not a must but helps understand the deeper message
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
What is the first thing that comes to mind when you hear the word DDD – Domain-Driven Design? The geeky technical patterns (Value object, Entity, Aggregate, etc.)? Walls decorated with colorful event storming stickies? A miracle cure to rescue change initiatives in large companies? Or are you thinking of a software development method born in the pre-cloud and pre-microservice era, which after 20 years is still struggling to gain traction?
Xin has lived and breathed DDD for more than a decade. In this talk, Xin makes a case for DDD’s rising relevance in a post-modern world, where aging companies struggle with aging software, while adding new software and complexity to their IT portfolio. The reflections will be grounded in solid DDD experiences and observations from the battlefield. With good attractor effect DDD can evolve from a software-centric design discipline to a multi-dimensional toolbox of thinking, modeling and collaboration techniques. You will be invited to explore DDD's value proposition and reflect upon how to leverage DDD’s strategic and tactical design approaches in your own context.
Globally, there is an increasing interest in DDD. Hope is evergreen for DDD to become a key ingredient in the magic potion for tackling the increasing complexity, not only at the heart of software, but also at the heart of sociotechnical organizations. How can DDD help us create meaning and productivity in a reality of multi-dimensional complexity and constant change? What’s in it for me? What’s in it for us?

A main theme in modern architectures is around fine-grained, isolated, reactive components, that are managed by autonomous teams (think microservices). This is considered key to decoupling, which, in turn, leads to business agility. Unfortunately, this often goes wrong and people end up with more tightly coupled systems, that are hard to understand and change - the opposite of agility. In this talk, I will explore why this happens and provide my view on how process orchestration can improve the situation without harming any good architecture.

Target Audience: Architects, Lead Engineers, IT Decision Makers
Prerequisites: Basic knowledge in Microservice architecture
Level: Basic

Extended Abstract:
I will walk you through the challenges around event-driven systems and microservices, talking about orchestration and choreography, also showing you how to balance both architectural approaches.
I will further discuss the importance of looking at end-to-end processes before going into local automations, as local optimizations can actually harm the global result.
I will further compare different approaches to automate end-to-end processes, from batches over streaming to workflow engines. You will understand the impact on agility and get guidance on decision criteria, backed by examples collected in various real-life projects.
I will sketch what influence those architecture decisions have on the governance and enterprise architecture of organizations.

Mehr Inhalte dieses Speakers? Schaut doch mal bei sigs.de vorbei: https://www.sigs.de/autor/bernd.ruecker

Architecture work has to balance providing clear guidance for important decisions with empowering people to build their aspects of the system without interference. In this session we'll explore how security principles can help achieve this for application security. The talk explains how principles can guide design decisions without being too prescriptive and explains a set of ten proven principles for designing secure systems, distilled from security engineering practice but presented in accessible language for the working software architect.

Target Audience: Architects, Developers, Testers, Project Managers
Prerequisites: Some experience in developing large scale systems
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
Security is an ever more important topic for system designers. As our world becomes digital, today’s safely-hidden back office system is tomorrow’s public API, open to anyone on the Internet with a hacking tool and time on their hands. So the days of hoping that security is someone else’s problem are over.
The security community has developed a well understood set of principles used to build systems that are secure (or at least securable) by design, but this topic often isn’t included in the training of software developers, assuming that it’s only relevant to security specialists. Then when principles are explained, they are often shrouded in the jargon of the security engineering community and so mainstream developers struggle to understand and apply them.
In this talk, we will introduce a set of ten key, proven, principles for designing secure systems, distilled from the wisdom of the security engineering community. We’ll explain each principle the context of mainstream system design, rather than in the specialised language of security engineering, explaining how it is applied in practice to improve security.

Mehr Inhalte dieses Speakers? Schaut doch mal bei sigs.de vorbei: https://www.sigs.de/autor/Eoin.Woods

Henning (OO to the core) and Mike (ferociously FP) agree on all the fundamentals of software architecture, but when it comes to designing models, they can't seem to find common ground.
OO and FP folks like to congratulate themselves on how well they go together - and how OO languages are accreting one feature after another from the FP world.
Henning and Mike will highlight how OO and FP approaches to design differ, and offer possible approaches to unifying both for mutual gain and insight.

Target Audience: Architects, Developers
Prerequisites: Experience in OO or FP
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
Much work remains to unify these two worlds:

1. OO folks are weary of premature abstractions, whereas FP folks tend to abstract early.
2. While both camps prefer operation-rich models, the approaches to designing these operations are incompatible. Specifically, the BDD and TDD approaches favored by the OO folks are incompatible with the design recipes approach preferred by the functional camp.
3. Paradoxically, OO - which is supposed to be about objects - espouses BDD which is about functions, whereas FP has a rich tradition in data design, i.e. objects.
4. In OO, objects populate the domain, and they are encapsulated and thus isolated, whereas in FP this encapsulation is an emergent (or not emergent) phenomenon.
5. OO is inherently stateful, and FP is inherently stateless. This naturally leads to very different approaches to interface design, and more importantly, to the use of types.

Mehr Inhalte dieser Speaker? Schaut doch mal bei sigs.de vorbei: https://www.sigs.de/autor/michael.sperber; https://www.sigs.de/autor/henning.schwentner

Expanding horizons has many facets. It means taking advantage of new opportunities that arise from technical progress, such as Large Language Models, or societal challenges like Sustainability. Expanding horizons also means taking responsibility. AI and data analytics have a direct impact on our future life, good and bad. Expanding horizons also means reflection on existing practice. We have perhaps forgotten the benefits of structured monoliths, or have sometimes overdone it with agility, which suggests a critical and learning retrospective.

Moderation: Frank Buschmann
Panelists: Isabel Bär, Zoe Lopez-Latorre, Carola Lilienthal, Xin Yao

Target Audience: Software Practitioners
Prerequisites: None
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
The motto of OOP 2024 has many facets. Expanding horizons means understanding and taking advantage of new opportunities that arise from technological progress or societal challenges. For example, on Large Language Models, Sustainability, and the Metaverse. Expanding horizons also means taking responsibility and not blindly applying new technologies. For example, AI and data analytics have a direct impact on our future life and social interaction. With all the consequences, good and bad. But broadening horizons also means reflecting on existing technologies and practices. In the course of the euphoria about microservices, for example, we have perhaps forgotten the advantages of the structured monolith too much, or have sometimes overdone it with agility. A critical and learning retrospective seems appropriate.
In this panel, we will examine the various aspects of the motto of OOP 2024 to give us all meaningful guiding thoughts for the exciting journey to expanding our horizons.

Designing good applications has become more demanding than ever: Extremely flexibility. Super-fast to change. Never down. Increasing user demands. Sustainability. Fewer developers. More AI. The list appears to be endless.
Many demands have not existed 10 or 15 years ago. Some have changed dramatically. Still, the discussions regarding architecture barely reflect that. In this session, we will take a look at how the architectural demands have changed and how to tackle the challenges of today best.

Target Audience: Architects, Senior Developers, Decision Makers
Prerequisites: Sound architectural knowledge makes the ideas presented easier to grasp
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
Designing good applications has become more demanding than ever: Extremely flexibility. Super-fast to change. Never down. Demand-based scaling. Increasing user demands. Sustainability. APIs as first class citizens. Secure like a fortress. Fewer developers. More AI. The list appears to be endless.
Many of today's architecture demands have not existed 10 or 15 years ago. Some have changed dramatically. Still, most discussions regarding architecture seem to be stuck in the early 2000s.
In this session, we will take a look at how our application design demands have changed, what it means today to design good applications and how to tackle the challenges best.
Let us catch up together and learn what architectural work today means!

Mehr Inhalte dieses Speakers? Schaut doch mal bei sigs.de vorbei: https://www.sigs.de/autor/uwe.friedrichsen

Continuous Software Architecture is an approach to software architecture that tries to move architecture from a set of up-front blueprints to a continually developed set of architectural knowledge and decisions. While a simple idea, actually putting it into practice can be difficult. In this talk we will briefly recap the idea of Continuous Software Architecture and then explore the key practices that are usually needed to achieve it, as well as the common problems and how to address them.

Target Audience: Architects, Developers, Technical Project Managers
Prerequisites: Some familiarity with agile development and modern architecture practice
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
Continuous Software Architecture is a philosophy and approach to software architecture that embraces the fact that doing most of the design before the implementation does not work very well, and perhaps never did. The approach tries to move architecture to a continually developed set of architectural knowledge and decisions, stressing collective ownership of the resulting architecture. This talk will provide attendees with practical and actionable advice on implementing the five key practices of Continuous Architecture: Technical Leadership, Achieving Quality Attributes, Driving Design Decisions, Managing Technical Debt and Implementing Feedback Loops.

Mehr Inhalte dieses Speakers? Schaut doch mal bei sigs.de vorbei: https://www.sigs.de/autor/Eoin.Woods

Most current UI libraries provide great user experience with a vast of components. But when it comes to heavy customization and non-standard scenarios, especially for E-Commerce, they become hard to manage, scale or even slow down performance. How to create a UI library that provides users the most possible freedom in customizing components, while keeping our performance and scalability to the fullest? How much customization freedom is enough? That's what my talk is about.

Target Audience: Developers, Architects, Project Leader
Prerequisites: JavaScript
Level: Advanced

Last year in open source, we saw the compliance threat shift from license violation to contract violation, we saw the rise of the bill of material as a purchasing requirement, and we saw the continued growth of source-available licenses. If you don't know what I'm talking about, you really need to attend, because your business is at risk if you don't understand these changes. In this annual talk, I will review the last year and speculate about what the future may bring.

Target Audience: Product Leaders, Engineering Leaders, Architects, Developers, Enthusiasts
Prerequisites: Basic understanding of open-source software development
Level: Advanced

In a microservices architecture, services shall be as loosely coupled as possible. Still, they need to communicate with each other in order to fulfill business requirements. Now there are so many questions around this communication (synchronous vs asynchronous, event-driven? what is the influence on the coupling of your services? ...?). This talk will help you answer these questions for your project. You will better understand not only the architectural implications but also the effect on the productivity of your teams.

Target Audience: Architects, Engineers, Developers
Prerequisites: Basic experience with distributed systems
Level: Basic

Extended Abstract:
In a microservices architecture, services shall be as loosely coupled as possible. Still, they need to communicate with each other in order to fulfill business requirements. Now there are so many questions around this communication:

1. What are the general possibilities to communicate? For example synchronous, asynchronous, or event-driven communication. What are the tradeoffs and which communication style should you prefer?
2. What is the influence on the coupling of your services? For example, asynchronous communication reduces temporal coupling between services.
3. What do I have to consider when selecting a certain communication style? For example, you need to apply certain resilience patterns if you want to use synchronous communication.

This talk will help you answer these questions for your project. You will better understand not only the architectural implications but also the effect on the productivity of your teams.

Mehr Inhalte dieses Speakers? Schaut doch mal bei sigs.de vorbei: https://www.sigs.de/autor/bernd.ruecker

Are you lost when folks talk about "quality" in the context of software? Just when you thought "high quality" means "good" and "QA" means "assure it's good", somebody hits you over the head with ISO 25010, where "quality" is just a neutral property of a software system. It's all a big happy pile of terminology quicksand where you sink faster the more you struggle for unambiguous and clear definitions. But we're here to help you out. We'll be looking at what's relevant about quality from a software architecture perspective.

Target Audience: Architects, Developers
Prerequisites: None
Level: Basic

Extended Abstract:
Among the prominent confusions is "quality requirements" vs. "functional requirements" - someone is sure to tell you that the first one is something not entirely unlike “non-functional” requirements. But if that distinction even is a thing, what's that "functional suitability" category of the ISO 25010 quality model? And where exactly do requirements even enter the picture? Once they do, how do we tell whether they are satisfied or not? And if they're not, how does all this terminology help with devising tactics for making things better? We'll separate out the taxonomy from the metrology, the metrology from the requirements, the functional from the non-functional (as far as this makes sense) and everything in between. We'll survey different ways of looking at quality and identify the murky areas where you need to be explicit about what you mean.

Mehr Inhalte dieses Speakers? Schaut doch mal bei sigs.de vorbei: https://www.sigs.de/autor/michael.sperber

**TL, DR;** Embrace no-code to explore more models and throw most of those models away. You will quickly discover what works, and what matters, in the business process that you are automating. If it matters enough, you can extract it into a high-fidelity design in code.

Target Audience: Everyone with a stake in the software production process
Prerequisites: None
Level: Basic

Extended Abstract:
Many software projects still consume considerable resources, and take a long time before anything material is put in the hands of the end-user. At a smaller scale this happens with teams that have the ambition to adopt Domain-Driven Design principles but that lack the expertise and experience in how to approach the design process. There is a spectrum of mistakes. On one hand there is the lack of producing a meaningful and shared model that is able to unify the conflicts and handle the complexity that the messy world will serve the system. On the other end of that spectrum there is analysis paralysis: a model that never sees the light of day, because there is always a new case it cannot handle. If the team doesn't produce a meaningful model, or if it fails to put that model in front of experts early on, then the team robs itself of precious feedback. "Judge models by their usefulness" is a mantra that is difficult to live by, if the model isn't being used...
Despite warnings, teams design big architectures early on, to support even bigger ambitions of the organization they work for, but they forget that it's not the architecture that the end-user cares about. With every bit of structure that is added early on, the team reduces the degrees of freedom to evolve the system at a later point in time. In order to support long-lasting design that is attuned to the environment, teams should set architectural principles that allow for a helpful structure to emerge, regardless of the platform.
> **No code** has entered the chat...
For a while now, no-code vendors have been telling organizations that they shouldn't be limited by expensive software engineers to build systems that are useful. No-code aims to commoditize the software production process. Commodification of technology leads to value if it removes a limitation, but successful adoption only works if the rules and policies that initially helped us overcome the limitation are replaced as well. Practices such as DevOps have to be adopted in order to reap the benefits of the commodification of compute and storage in the cloud. In order to benefit from serverless, system components need to be decoupled through message-driven designs. In order to benefit from no-code, people have to organize around the software production process in a different way.
Within software engineering communities no-code has been dismissed as a fad, saying the need for writing code will never go away because the needs of most software systems are too complex to capture in a visual design environment. This viewpoint ignores the argument that software engineers act as a gatekeeper, a limitation for the stakeholder to get what they want. It is reductionist to say that no-code means no-code. No-code is as much about no-code, as wireless is about the absence of wires, or serverless is about the absence of servers. No-code means less boilerplate. And no-code does NOT mean no-model.
The inability to deliver meaningful results in a reasonable amount of time is never out of bad intent, it's the consequence of rigidity in the system of work. If there is no room for experiments, for error, for trying again, then we shouldn't be surprised if people attempt moonshots. But if we can reduce the cost of experiments, then we should be able to iterate more, learn faster, and as a consequence produce more value.
Let's explore how no-code is able to remove the time to market of our ideas to explore new models. Join this session to uncover which rules, policies, and practices around modeling and design need to be replaced in order to reap the benefits that no-code has to offer.

High traffic during business hours, no traffic at night, weekends and vacations, multiple teams, and several staging environments - these characteristics of a typical enterprise application. Pay-as-you-go, "scale-to-zero" and managed services make serverless architectures appealing for enterprise applications.
On-premise, on the other hand, you get the maximum flexibility and full access to machines with less automation and so more plumbing.
I will compare both approaches with focus on architecture and answer your questions in real time.

Target Audience: Developers, Architects
Prerequisites: Basic Cloud and Java Knowledge
Level: Advanced

Great engineers often use back-of-the-envelope calculations to estimate resources and costs. This practice is equally beneficial in Machine Learning Engineering, aiding in confirming the feasibility and value of an ML project. In my talk, I'll introduce a collaborative design toolkit for ML projects. It includes Machine Learning Canvas and MLOps Stack Canvas to identify ML use cases and perform initial prototyping, thus ensuring a business problem can be effectively solved within reasonable cost and resource parameters.

Target Audience: Architects, Developers, Project Leader, Data Scientist
Prerequisites: Basic knowledge in machine learning
Level: Advanced

**TL,DR**; In this course you will learn to map your business and technological landscape in such a way that a common language emerges to discuss strategic thinking and decision-making.
Max. number of participants: 13

Target Audience: Architects, Developers, Project Leaders, Decision Makers
Prerequisites: Basic theoretical knowledge of DDD
Level: Advanced

Extended Abstract:
Organizations face more and more complexity these days as a result of a mesh of products, services, technology and the people that work to build, operate and maintain them.
Domain-Driven Design helps us with solving problems the right way. But what helps us solve the right problem? How can we continuously validate our progress with people in "non-tech" roles? And what should we do when the world around us changes, which it always ends up doing? Is the plan we had still valid?

Imagine...
- Imagine having a map that helps you understand the ecosystem your organization is embedded in. A map that makes sense from both a technical and business perspective. With patterns that provide guidance about effective actions regardless of the specific domain you are working in. Wardley Mapping is that: it is a ubiquitous language around strategy and execution that helps you solve the right problem.

The course
- In this course you will learn to map your business and technological landscape in such a way that a common language emerges to discuss strategic thinking and decision making. It allows for scenario building, it teaches about bias and assumptions, and it comes packaged with a long list of ideas that may help in your situation.
The map can hint us what practices from DDD are beneficial in our situation. And it can serve as a context map too, except this one has meaning to businesspeople as well.
Using visualizations, strategies can be challenged and implementation options debated and weighed. As such, mapping is about the act and not merely the artifact. That is why this training is hands-on from the very start.

What to expect
- This class will emphasize practice over theory. Mapping with imperfect knowledge today is better than mapping with perfect knowledge next year. The course will teach you the basics and provides hooks into the theoretical aspects behind exercises.

Who should attend
- Anyone that wants to challenge the status quo of decision making under uncertainty in technology and business. No prior knowledge is required and your open attitude to learn new things will be an asset during the workshop.