agentleFS
lza6lza6/claw-code-tingfeng/skills/deprecation-and-migration/SKILL.md

deprecation-and-migration

Skill5 starsChanged 13 days agoMITView on GitHub

Manages deprecation and migration. Use when removing old systems, APIs, or features. Use when migrating users from one implementation to another. Use when deciding whether to maintain or sunset existing code.

63 other projects use a version of this, 29 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use constraint-driven-development, playwright-cli and 6 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • MrCipherSmithSkill

    constraint-driven-development

    Use when a project needs a persistent, measurable quality bar — starting a project without documented standards, 'set up constraints', or when coverage/perf/a11y thresholds get re-debated per-PR. Produces CONSTRAINTS.md with enforceable numbers, ratchets, and a guard against silent weakening. NOT for throwaway prototypes or a one-off CI setup.

    Also in 14 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    playwright-cli

    Automate browser interactions, test web pages and work with Playwright tests.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • OpenAISkill

    brainstorming

    You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • OpenAISkill

    verification-before-completion

    Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    caveman

    Ultra-compressed response style that reduces output token count while preserving technical accuracy, with intensity levels and auto-clarity safety rules

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • VercelSkill

    vercel-react-best-practices

    React and Next.js performance optimization guidelines from Vercel Engineering. This skill should be used when writing, reviewing, or refactoring React/Next.js code to ensure optimal performance patterns. Triggers on tasks involving React components, Next.js pages, data fetching, bundle optimization, or performance improvements.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • +1 more from microsoft

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

12 rules. 12 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 12

    Common

    Most of the 35 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Common:

    When building something new, ask: "How would we remove this in 3 years?" Systems designed with clean interfaces, feature flags, and minimal …

    line 35
  2. Common:

    Before deprecating anything, answer these questions:

    line 39
  3. Common:

    Default to advisory: Use compulsory only when the maintenance cost or risk justifies forcing migration.

    line 65
  4. Common:

    Don't deprecate without a working alternative.

    line 71
  5. Common:

    The Churn Rule: If you own the infrastructure being deprecated, you are responsible for migrating your users — or providing …

    line 106
  6. Common:

    Only after all consumers have migrated:

    line 110
  7. Common:

    Run old and new systems in parallel.

    line 124
  8. Common:

    Create an adapter that translates calls from the old interface to the new implementation.

    line 136
  9. Common:

    Use feature flags to switch consumers from old to new system one at a time:

    line 153
  10. Common:

    No commits in 6+ months but active consumers exist

    line 168
  11. Common:

    No assigned maintainer or team

    line 169
  12. Common:

    After completing a deprecation:

    line 199

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 35 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Deprecation and Migration

Overview

Code is a liability, not an asset. Every line of code has ongoing maintenance cost — bugs to fix, dependencies to update, security patches to apply, and new engineers to onboard. Deprecation is the discipline of removing code that no longer earns its keep, and migration is the process of moving users safely from the old to the new.

Most engineering organizations are good at building things. Few are good at removing them. This skill addresses that gap.

When to Use

  • Replacing an old system, API, or library with a new one
  • Sunsetting a feature that's no longer needed
  • Consolidating duplicate implementations
  • Removing dead code that nobody owns but everybody depends on
  • Planning the lifecycle of a new system (deprecation planning starts at design time)
  • Deciding whether to maintain a legacy system or invest in migration

Core Principles

Code Is a Liability

Every line of code has ongoing cost: it needs tests, documentation, security patches, dependency updates, and mental overhead for anyone working nearby. The value of code is the functionality it provides, not the code itself. When the same functionality can be provided with less code, less complexity, or better abstractions — the old code should go.

Hyrum's Law Makes Removal Hard

With enough users, every observable behavior becomes depended on — including bugs, timing quirks, and undocumented side effects. This is why deprecation requires active migration, not just announcement. Users can't "just switch" when they depend on behaviors the replacement doesn't replicate.

Deprecation Planning Starts at Design Time

When building something new, ask: "How would we remove this in 3 years?" Systems designed with clean interfaces, feature flags, and minimal surface area are easier to deprecate than systems that leak implementation details everywhere.

The Deprecation Decision

Before deprecating anything, answer these questions:

1. Does this system still provide unique value?
   → If yes, maintain it. If no, proceed.

2. How many users/consumers depend on it?
   → Quantify the migration scope.

3. Does a replacement exist?
   → If no, build the replacement first. Don't deprecate without an alternative.

4. What's the migration cost for each consumer?
   → If trivially automated, do it. If manual and high-effort, weigh against maintenance cost.

5. What's the ongoing maintenance cost of NOT deprecating?
   → Security risk, engineer time, opportunity cost of complexity.

Compulsory vs Advisory Deprecation

TypeWhen to UseMechanism
AdvisoryMigration is optional, old system is stableWarnings, documentation, nudges. Users migrate on their own timeline.
CompulsoryOld system has security issues, blocks progress, or maintenance cost is unsustainableHard deadline. Old system will be removed by date X. Provide migration tooling.

Default to advisory. Use compulsory only when the maintenance cost or risk justifies forcing migration. Compulsory deprecation requires providing migration tooling, documentation, and support — you can't just announce a deadline.

The Migration Process

Step 1: Build the Replacement

Don't deprecate without a working alternative. The replacement must:

  • Cover all critical use cases of the old system
  • Have documentation and migration guides
  • Be proven in production (not just "theoretically better")

Step 2: Announce and Document

## Deprecation Notice: OldService

**Status:** Deprecated as of 2025-03-01
**Replacement:** NewService (see migration guide below)
**Removal date:** Advisory — no hard deadline yet
**Reason:** OldService requires manual scaling and lacks observability.
            NewService handles both automatically.

### Migration Guide
1. Replace `import { client } from 'old-service'` with `import { client } from 'new-service'`
2. Update configuration (see examples below)
3. Run the migration verification script: `npx migrate-check`

Step 3: Migrate Incrementally

Migrate consumers one at a time, not all at once. For each consumer:

1. Identify all touchpoints with the deprecated system
2. Update to use the replacement
3. Verify behavior matches (tests, integration checks)
4. Remove references to the old system
5. Confirm no regressions

The Churn Rule: If you own the infrastructure being deprecated, you are responsible for migrating your users — or providing backward-compatible updates that require no migration. Don't announce deprecation and leave users to figure it out.

Step 4: Remove the Old System

Only after all consumers have migrated:

1. Verify zero active usage (metrics, logs, dependency analysis)
2. Remove the code
3. Remove associated tests, documentation, and configuration
4. Remove the deprecation notices
5. Celebrate — removing code is an achievement

Migration Patterns

Strangler Pattern

Run old and new systems in parallel. Route traffic incrementally from old to new. When the old system handles 0% of traffic, remove it.

Phase 1: New system handles 0%, old handles 100%
Phase 2: New system handles 10% (canary)
Phase 3: New system handles 50%
Phase 4: New system handles 100%, old system idle
Phase 5: Remove old system

Adapter Pattern

Create an adapter that translates calls from the old interface to the new implementation. Consumers keep using the old interface while you migrate the backend.

// Adapter: old interface, new implementation
class LegacyTaskService implements OldTaskAPI {
  constructor(private newService: NewTaskService) {}

  // Old method signature, delegates to new implementation
  getTask(id: number): OldTask {
    const task = this.newService.findById(String(id));
    return this.toOldFormat(task);
  }
}

Feature Flag Migration

Use feature flags to switch consumers from old to new system one at a time:

function getTaskService(userId: string): TaskService {
  if (featureFlags.isEnabled('new-task-service', { userId })) {
    return new NewTaskService();
  }
  return new LegacyTaskService();
}

Zombie Code

Zombie code is code that nobody owns but everybody depends on. It's not actively maintained, has no clear owner, and accumulates security vulnerabilities and compatibility issues. Signs:

  • No commits in 6+ months but active consumers exist
  • No assigned maintainer or team
  • Failing tests that nobody fixes
  • Dependencies with known vulnerabilities that nobody updates
  • Documentation that references systems that no longer exist

Response: Either assign an owner and maintain it properly, or deprecate it with a concrete migration plan. Zombie code cannot stay in limbo — it either gets investment or removal.

Common Rationalizations

RationalizationReality
"It still works, why remove it?"Working code that nobody maintains accumulates security debt and complexity. Maintenance cost grows silently.
"Someone might need it later"If it's needed later, it can be rebuilt. Keeping unused code "just in case" costs more than rebuilding.
"The migration is too expensive"Compare migration cost to ongoing maintenance cost over 2-3 years. Migration is usually cheaper long-term.
"We'll deprecate it after we finish the new system"Deprecation planning starts at design time. By the time the new system is done, you'll have new priorities. Plan now.
"Users will migrate on their own"They won't. Provide tooling, documentation, and incentives — or do the migration yourself (the Churn Rule).
"We can maintain both systems indefinitely"Two systems doing the same thing is double the maintenance, testing, documentation, and onboarding cost.

Red Flags

  • Deprecated systems with no replacement available
  • Deprecation announcements with no migration tooling or documentation
  • "Soft" deprecation that's been advisory for years with no progress
  • Zombie code with no owner and active consumers
  • New features added to a deprecated system (invest in the replacement instead)
  • Deprecation without measuring current usage
  • Removing code without verifying zero active consumers

Verification

After completing a deprecation:

  • Replacement is production-proven and covers all critical use cases
  • Migration guide exists with concrete steps and examples
  • All active consumers have been migrated (verified by metrics/logs)
  • Old code, tests, documentation, and configuration are fully removed
  • No references to the deprecated system remain in the codebase
  • Deprecation notices are removed (they served their purpose)

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.