zlacker

But these are "significant problems with the code" which evidently can't be fixed by simply reverting relevant changes. In that case, it seems more likely to me that these are due to long-standing issues which would have caught up to the company sooner or later.

>>tomato+(OP)
which evidently can't be fixed by simply reverting relevant changes

Rumors suggest that part of the change is moving from GCP to something else. Something like can't be reverted without signing a new contract with Google (and paying the bill..).

>>onion2+3d
Ah - I hadn't heard that and it does make some sense. But I'm not sure that the alternative version of events (where the engineers who were fired or left were still around) would look much better in that case - perhaps delay/better planning might have helped (though of course we don't know how much planning was done) but it's also entirely credible that this was essentially inevitable with such a move.