Contract Driven Development: The Death of Integration Hell
summary
A workflow that treats API specs as executable contracts and stores them in a versioned central repo (Qontract / contract.run) gives immediate, automated feedback: the same spec runs contract-as-tests against providers, becomes a wire‑compatible stub for consumers, and CI runs a backward‑compatibility check that rejects incompatible changes. The claim is removal of late integration breakages and of bulky SIT cycles by shifting verification left and enabling independent deploys rather than release trains.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (20)
- 0:00Introduction
- 0:22Overview
- 4:09About Naresh Jain
- 9:18Shift Left
- 11:59Application Test Pyramid
- 16:59Product Test Pyramid
- 18:09Million Dollar Question
- 19:49Mocking Frameworks
- 21:19Misunderstanding
- 23:24Contract Driven Development
- 24:46Collaborative Contract Authoring
- 27:39Version Control
- 28:09Contract Tests
- 29:27Contract Stub
- 30:26Live Demo
- 33:49Consumer Tests
- 38:07Local Contracts
- 39:57Contract Push
- 42:15Summary
- 43:12Questions
related talks
51mContract-Driven Development-Escape Microservices Integration & Deployment Hell
01h 21mContract Driven Development-Deploy MicroServices Independently W/out Integration Testing
01h 20mContract Driven Development-Deploying MicroServices Without Integration Testing
49mCollaborative Contract Driven Development
50mContract-Driven Development
32mContracts for Hire
47mCollaborative Contract Driven Development
39mWhy you should contract test your Microservices 🧭