Its interesting because, although I don't know the linkedin codebases nor worked at linkedin, I've seen a few codebases that sound scarily similar and am familiar with a few companies that sound organisationally and politically scarily similar.
And I generally advocate 'finger gun' approaches.
Finger gun rewrites can be implemented in a good way. Often when you have n clients trying to do the same thing, one of those can be used as a basis for serving the other platforms. Or if you start over, you can do it in a good clean quick concise way.
The general success ingredient is putting a small team of veterans on making the new system. Success always comes from a small team of engineers who are both domain experts and technical experts rolled into one. (Controversially, I think that generalises; all success comes from this, even for mundane keep-the-lights-on problems. And everyone else is just slowing them down.)
The big problem most tech management everywhere keeps repeating is that the next big system will be built the least-experienced.
Would be really nice to hear the symmetrical interview from a finger-gunner.
And I generally advocate 'finger gun' approaches.
Finger gun rewrites can be implemented in a good way. Often when you have n clients trying to do the same thing, one of those can be used as a basis for serving the other platforms. Or if you start over, you can do it in a good clean quick concise way.
The general success ingredient is putting a small team of veterans on making the new system. Success always comes from a small team of engineers who are both domain experts and technical experts rolled into one. (Controversially, I think that generalises; all success comes from this, even for mundane keep-the-lights-on problems. And everyone else is just slowing them down.)
The big problem most tech management everywhere keeps repeating is that the next big system will be built the least-experienced.
Would be really nice to hear the symmetrical interview from a finger-gunner.