Software project takeover
Software project takeover and continued development
Your application already supports a business. Now the vendor is leaving, the original developer is unavailable, or the AI-built version needs engineering beyond its first release.
Someone needs to understand what runs, what matters and what can safely change.
Better works with existing and AI-built products. We can discuss a paid assessment, with scope and fees agreed after a fit conversation, followed by continued development where the engagement makes sense. Our delivery approach includes review and testing. How Better works.
Handover
Establish what the new team can operate
Receiving source code leaves several questions open. Can another engineer build it? Does that version match the running application? Who controls the database, hosting and integrations?
The handover needs to connect the repository to customer workflows, deployment environments, scheduled work and external services. It also needs a named person who can accept a change for the business.
Some access details persist through a transfer. GitHub documents that collaborators, secrets and deploy keys remain associated with a transferred repository. Moving ownership therefore needs an explicit access review. GitHub repository transfers.
For a Lovable-built application, GitHub integration provides code export and synchronization. The database, credentials, integrations and runtime configuration still need to be inventoried and checked separately. A code export alone does not establish that those dependencies are portable. Lovable GitHub integration.
Assessment
Start with the workflows the business needs
A useful assessment starts with what the product must keep doing. That might be accepting an order, inviting a colleague or producing an operational report. We identify the users, expected outcomes and consequences of failure before deciding which technical work deserves attention.
The proposed assessment should leave you with a written view of what could be reproduced, what remains uncertain or inaccessible, which issues affect continued operation, and what the next phase should deliver. Access gaps belong in that report alongside technical findings.
We agree the scope before work starts. The inspection may establish a path to targeted repairs and continued development. It may also uncover missing access, an unsupported dependency or a specialist requirement that changes the plan. Estimate the next phase from those findings.
Evidence record
Make the handover testable
For each critical workflow, use a takeover evidence record. The structure below is a proposed assessment artifact, not a completed customer assessment.
| Record | What it should establish |
|---|---|
| Business workflow | What a user needs to accomplish and the expected result |
| Source and build | The source version, required configuration and evidence that it builds |
| Role behavior | Which users may act and which users must be denied |
| Deployment and recovery | How the verified version reaches its environment, what it depends on and the available recovery path |
| Findings and acceptance | The observed result, unresolved dependencies, next decision and business owner who accepts it |
Mark each check as verified, failed or not checked. Record the environment and version. A screenshot of an earlier release cannot establish the behavior of a later one.
The record makes uncertainty visible. It helps the incoming team identify the first change it can make responsibly and gives the business a concrete basis for accepting that work.
Hypothetical example
A worked example: orders across two workspaces
Consider a hypothetical order-management application with two customer workspaces. This example illustrates the method; it is not a Better customer result.
A user in Workspace A should be able to create and view their orders. A user in Workspace B should be denied access to those orders when changing a URL or calling the API directly. Use isolated test accounts and synthetic orders for the check.
The evidence record names the source version, captures both allowed and denied behavior, references the deployment procedure and identifies the operations owner who accepts the result. If the new team cannot reproduce the build, that remains an unresolved finding even when the existing demo works.
For a Supabase application, database access depends on grants and row-level security policies. Service-role access can bypass those policies, so backend request paths need review alongside browser behavior. Supabase row-level security.
Lovable says its security scans do not replace a thorough security review. Document what was checked and where specialist review is needed. Lovable security overview.
Continued maintenance
Agree what continued maintenance includes
An incoming team needs an agreed backlog and operating responsibilities. Decide who reviews changes, authorizes releases, watches for failures and handles escalation. Support hours and response expectations need to be scoped with the engagement. This page does not establish round-the-clock coverage.
Better's published starting reference is around USD15,000 per month for a pod with a product manager and two engineers. Scope and allocation are agreed for the engagement. Assessment fees are scoped separately; the monthly figure is a reference for continued delivery. Better pricing.
That budget needs to match the value and planned work in the product. A lightly used prototype needing occasional edits may need a smaller support arrangement than a continuing product team.
If the assessment raises a replacement question, use the existing rewrite versus refactor guide to frame the investment decision. For preparation, see the code ownership and handover guide. Neither replaces checking the actual application.
Next milestone
Discuss the product and the next milestone
Bring the product URL, current stack if known, access situation and next business milestone. Keep credentials and customer data out of the booking notes. We can use the conversation to determine whether there is a practical starting scope.
