4 ms·
That's one definition of "legacy". The other is "oh shit, this stuff isn't supported any more and is now a liability". Which is a problem, because the longer y
by guitarbill 6y ago
That's one definition of "legacy". The other is "oh shit, this stuff isn't supported any more and is now a liability".
Which is a problem, because the longer you're unaware, the more the liability and unknown unknowns grow. Eventually, the liability and cost to replace are huge/bigger than it being an asset. The problem just gets harder; especially if you ignore it until it goes horribly wrong. See a comment above [0] for how this could happen.
Responsible, senior devs should be able to provide some guidance to the business at what point the system or sub-system is on that liability vs asset curve. "Not cool any more" isn't that kind of advice.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24769695 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24769695
- parsley27 6y agoI think part of the value that senior people (those of us who have been in the industry for decades) bring is the wisdom of when a system has gone from uncool to dangerously unmaintainable. Part of me wonders if it's because we old-timers ourselves know what it's like to be on that specific journey personally.
- cik 6y agoIt's not lost on me just how intellectually interesting dangerously unmaintainable becomes. I love working on new things, they're fun - but things that are legitimately mind breaking are a fascinating challenge.
- mathattack 6y agoThe lack of support is critical. They are time bombs.
- pabs3 6y agoThe moment something becomes uncool, it starts the process of becoming harder to find developers. Something that has fewer available developers is more of a liability.