旧功能废弃、系统迁移与安全下线规划
用于处理旧 API、旧模块、旧服务或历史功能不能再继续维护、但又不能直接删除的场景。它会先评估旧代码的真实使用者和兼容性风险,区分强制迁移与建议迁移,再按“先构建替代方案、发布迁移说明、逐步迁移调用方、监控残余使用、最后删除旧系统”的顺序制定计划,并特别考虑 Hyrum’s Law 下那些未写进文档却已经被外部依赖的行为;适合接口升级、架构替换、旧数据库/服务迁移和清理 Zombie Code,最终目标是在不突然打断现有用户和生产业务的前提下真正完成旧系统退出。
在 AI 中使用此 Skill将本页链接复制给 AI,即可让 AI 获取完整 Skill 内容并按此执行
安全提示: 本站 Skill 均经 ChatGPT 最新模型扫描,未发现恶意脚本及危险指令、未检出已知恶意行为特征,但不保证绝对安全,使用即表示接受此风险
Skill 文件
版本 20260403 · dc0a49d7cc0433e1d5e65037ad7692a9
SKILL.md
---
name: deprecation-and-migration
description: 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.
---
# 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.
> **Dependency safety:** Project CLI commands in this Skill assume the relevant package is already pinned in the project lockfile and installed locally. If it is missing, ask before installing it; do not use `npx` auto-install as a fallback.
## 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
| Type | When to Use | Mechanism |
|------|-------------|-----------|
| **Advisory** | Migration is optional, old system is stable | Warnings, documentation, nudges. Users migrate on their own timeline. |
| **Compulsory** | Old system has security issues, blocks progress, or maintenance cost is unsustainable | Hard 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
```markdown
## 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: `./node_modules/.bin/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.
```typescript
// 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:
```typescript
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
| Rationalization | Reality |
|---|---|
| "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)
此文件不提供内嵌文本预览
请使用左侧文件行末尾的外链图标打开原始文件。
