The people who built it have left. The system has not.
LARGE ESTATES, LONG HISTORIES, AND SYSTEMS OLDER THAN MOST OF THE TEAM
Parts of the estate predate most of the people maintaining them. The design decisions are real and load-bearing, and the reasoning behind them left with the authors.
You cannot guess here. Regulation, audits and scale mean a change has to be scoped with evidence before it is approved, not after it is deployed.
Weeks of reading before anyone can say what a modernization would involve.
The migration cannot be scoped, so it cannot be funded, so it stays on the roadmap.
Assessments assembled by committee from partial knowledge, then filed.
What does this legacy service actually do today?
What would a migration off it touch?
Where does customer data flow through this part of the estate?
What must be verified before we can approve this change?
You ask what depends on the service and what it does that nothing else does.
The answer separates what is genuinely load-bearing from what is dead, with the evidence for each.
The migration is scoped from that rather than from the recollection of the two people who were here in 2019.
A programme that could not be estimated becomes one that can be, which is the step that unblocks funding.
A WORKED EXAMPLE OF HOW THE WORK GOES, NOT A CUSTOMER CASE STUDY. WHEN WE PUBLISH A CUSTOMER RESULT IT WILL BE MEASURED AND NAMED.
What a migration would reach is answered from the system rather than reconstructed by a working group.
Every statement traces back to the code it came from, which is what an auditor asks for.
It stays current with the estate instead of leaving in an exit interview.
Private deployment and private MCP inside your own VPC, on-premises or isolated environment, with SSO, RBAC and an SLA.
OTHER COMPANY TYPES
Solo founders · SaaS startups · Scale-ups · Agencies and outsourcing · AI product teams · All six