<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Migration on F. Latini - IT Engineer</title><link>https://latini.dev/tags/migration/</link><description>Recent content in Migration on F. Latini - IT Engineer</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2026 08:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://latini.dev/tags/migration/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>How to Retire a Golden Path</title><link>https://latini.dev/posts/how-to-retire-a-golden-path/</link><pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2026 08:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://latini.dev/posts/how-to-retire-a-golden-path/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR&lt;/strong&gt; - Platform teams write down how to build a paved road and never write down how to close one, so closing one is improvised, and it stalls. The failure mode is specific and almost universal: you announce the deprecation, sixty percent of the estate moves in the first two months, the tail does not move at all, and you now operate two roads forever. That is strictly worse than never having announced, because you pay double maintenance and your successor road stops being the obvious default. A retirement is a product launch in reverse and needs the same apparatus: a destination that already works for the workload class you are evicting, a migration you wrote and tested yourself, an inventory of who is actually on the old road, a named person funded to move the last twenty percent, an escalating date with a brownout before it, and an ending you delete rather than archive. Design path one so it can be closed, and most of this gets much cheaper.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>