Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • 1
    +1 that is exactly how we approached it. Although the whole idea of 'starting over' is very unagile. How hard have you tried considering to substitute the old solution bit by bit? Commented May 2, 2012 at 6:01
  • @KrisVanBael that's theoretically better (and definitely an ideal) but it's another of those "it depends" questions - some old solutions are really old (so one is looking at platform changes) or the process is wired/integrated into the system end to end and the "bits" can be rather large. Commented May 2, 2012 at 8:19
  • I was working somewhere where the orginal was shipped to market very quickly and therefore the design was pretty bad. We had the idea of starting over with a better idea of what to do and hopefully better code. It never went ahead which was for the best cause the cost to benefit was not viable. If the existing system works then make small improvements to it overtime. Commented May 2, 2012 at 21:02