Legacy software modernisation
The system works. Changing it is the problem. Every release breaks something unrelated, the estimate for a small feature is three weeks, and the people who wrote it have left.
What this covers
- Reading the system and writing down how it actually behaves today
- Repairing the data model, including migrations for records already stored wrongly
- Dependency and runtime upgrades that have been deferred for years
- Test coverage around the rules that matter, so changes stop being blind
- Splitting apart the parts that should never have been coupled
- Staged replacement of components, without a single high-risk launch
When a company needs this
When the engineering answer to every request is that it is complicated. When nobody will touch a particular file. When a dependency is so old that a security patch cannot be applied.
Also before a rebuild is decided. A refactor is frequently cheaper than a rewrite, and the audit will tell you which one applies.
What usually goes wrong
- A rewrite started in parallel, so two systems are maintained and neither finishes
- Refactoring without tests, which is just rewriting with extra confidence
- Cleaning up code while leaving the data model that caused the mess
- Upgrading everything at once, making the failure impossible to isolate
What we do
We start by establishing facts: what the system does, what the data looks like, what is covered by tests and what is not. That assessment is the audit.
Then we work in small, reversible steps with the system live throughout. No parallel rewrite, no freeze on feature work unless you want one.
How the engagement runs
- Audit first, always — refactoring a system we have not read is guesswork
- A prioritised sequence, starting with whatever is currently causing incidents
- Each step deployed and verified before the next begins
- Your team involved throughout, so the knowledge stays with you
Give us access and a week.
An audit on an existing system tells you what a rebuild would and would not solve.