A temporary file integration without an exit decision

Anonymised case. Based on a real architectural dilemma with identifying details removed. This describes a decision risk; it does not claim an unverified failure or outcome.

Situation

A large project introduces a new back-office system on a tight schedule. The team chooses a familiar integration: one system prepares a file, an intermediary processes it, and another imports the data. Architects review the direction after it has been chosen. They see a short-term benefit in reusing a known flow and a long-term cost in inheriting the old contract's constraints.

Where the anti-pattern appears

Files and batches are not inherently wrong. The problem starts when a launch-time compromise is presented as the final design without an explicit decision about data lag, failures, contract ownership and a path out.

“We will change it someday” is not a migration plan. A late architecture review must distinguish an assessment of an existing decision's risk from unconditional endorsement.

Questions that expose the risk

• Who owns the format and its versioning rules?
• How are a missing file, duplicate, retry and partial import detected and handled?
• Do consumers depend on internal export structure instead of a stable business contract?
• Who owns migration, what triggers it and when is the decision reviewed?

These are review questions, not claims that every issue occurred in the source project.

Make the trade-off explicit

1. Call the solution temporary if that is its role. Record the reason and the cost of deviating from the intended direction.
2. Specify the data contract, frequency, acceptable lag, completeness checks, retries, idempotency and failure ownership.
3. Compare options against actual needs. An API or events are not automatically better; freshness, scale, resilience and change cost matter.
4. Give the migration plan an owner, triggers, backlog, compatibility tests and a review date.
5. Separate the architecture opinion from the project's decision to accept a deadline and its risk.

Rule to remember

A time-bound compromise needs boundaries, an owner and exit conditions. Without them, the interim design can become permanent debt.