This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Service virtualization article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
Per Wikipedia guidelines ( Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources), I've been trying to edit this page to focus on "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy", not content self-published by tool vendors. Swtechwr ( talk) 16:30, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
How is "service virtualization" different from mocking. Is the only difference that of being a "service"?-- Methossant ( talk) 20:49, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Service Virtualization is widely recognized across the industry as being different than mocking. For example, see analyst reports (Gartner, Forrester, IDC, Bloor, etc.) and industry publications (SD Times, Dr. Dobb’s Journal, STC Crosstalk, Information Week, ZD Net, Tech arget, etc. Some specific discussions focused on this issue include http://www.infoq.com/news/2013/04/Service-Virtualization, http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12055654/stubs-mocks-vs-service-virtualization-yikes, http://vimeopro.com/itko/itko-ca-lisa-videos/page/4. The distinction is also covered within books such as Service Virtualization for Dummies and Service Virtualization: Reality is Overrated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Softwareqa ( talk • contribs) 17:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Speaking as an SQA professional, the industry considers "mock" to be synonymous with this technique. See, for example, WireMock. The sources (which do not seem to be very WP:RS to me) create their distinction by using a very specific, developer-oriented, and outdated definition of "mock" that is only relevant at the method unit test level.
If someone can find a source for "Service virtualization" that doesn't involve a mention of CA Technologies, that would be telling. That is to say, I'm pretty sure that "service virtualization" is a term only used by CA to advertise (and disingenuously differentiate) their products from the current industry definitions. It works on CIOs and non-technical MMs, but not on technical staff. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 21:34, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
As several have noted, this article is in need of a rewrite for the intro. I'd like to collaborate here if we may and come up with something that is more academic as well as useful to the casual observer. In particular, we have to note that the term has two related meanings, one of which is really about the decoupling of request/response logic from the physical constraints (I know, need to write that more clearly) and the other related meaning which is the same thing specifically as it applies to software testing. Then the article can cover both those areas with a description of what they are, what they aren't etc. Thoughts? Suggestions? Helpful resources? CodeCurmudgeon ( talk) 22:35, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
So ouch - an editor took an article they wrote at Dzone and used it to add a "next generation" section here. I can't find much sourcing other than marketing fluff, and even the referenced article doesn't actually define the term the way this new section does. I see there was indeed a conference recently using the term as referenced in the dzone article, but that's hardly enough to warrant this section here. Are there better references around this term, and what it means? I was unable to find anything meeting WP standards. CodeCurmudgeon ( talk) 19:13, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Service virtualization article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
Per Wikipedia guidelines ( Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources), I've been trying to edit this page to focus on "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy", not content self-published by tool vendors. Swtechwr ( talk) 16:30, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
How is "service virtualization" different from mocking. Is the only difference that of being a "service"?-- Methossant ( talk) 20:49, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Service Virtualization is widely recognized across the industry as being different than mocking. For example, see analyst reports (Gartner, Forrester, IDC, Bloor, etc.) and industry publications (SD Times, Dr. Dobb’s Journal, STC Crosstalk, Information Week, ZD Net, Tech arget, etc. Some specific discussions focused on this issue include http://www.infoq.com/news/2013/04/Service-Virtualization, http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12055654/stubs-mocks-vs-service-virtualization-yikes, http://vimeopro.com/itko/itko-ca-lisa-videos/page/4. The distinction is also covered within books such as Service Virtualization for Dummies and Service Virtualization: Reality is Overrated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Softwareqa ( talk • contribs) 17:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Speaking as an SQA professional, the industry considers "mock" to be synonymous with this technique. See, for example, WireMock. The sources (which do not seem to be very WP:RS to me) create their distinction by using a very specific, developer-oriented, and outdated definition of "mock" that is only relevant at the method unit test level.
If someone can find a source for "Service virtualization" that doesn't involve a mention of CA Technologies, that would be telling. That is to say, I'm pretty sure that "service virtualization" is a term only used by CA to advertise (and disingenuously differentiate) their products from the current industry definitions. It works on CIOs and non-technical MMs, but not on technical staff. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 21:34, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
As several have noted, this article is in need of a rewrite for the intro. I'd like to collaborate here if we may and come up with something that is more academic as well as useful to the casual observer. In particular, we have to note that the term has two related meanings, one of which is really about the decoupling of request/response logic from the physical constraints (I know, need to write that more clearly) and the other related meaning which is the same thing specifically as it applies to software testing. Then the article can cover both those areas with a description of what they are, what they aren't etc. Thoughts? Suggestions? Helpful resources? CodeCurmudgeon ( talk) 22:35, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
So ouch - an editor took an article they wrote at Dzone and used it to add a "next generation" section here. I can't find much sourcing other than marketing fluff, and even the referenced article doesn't actually define the term the way this new section does. I see there was indeed a conference recently using the term as referenced in the dzone article, but that's hardly enough to warrant this section here. Are there better references around this term, and what it means? I was unable to find anything meeting WP standards. CodeCurmudgeon ( talk) 19:13, 14 November 2017 (UTC)