I suppose it's up to the culture and willingness of the people that work there to learn and apply themselves to maintaining such a solution. Traditionally I've found (in the ones I've worked for, at least) that companies tend to stubbornly stick to a particular stack. Introducing new technology is seen as an overhead (which it is!) since it will impair onboarding time for existing developers.
The example was more of an aside - an additional benefit to suggest that even if all the tech you use is the same, this could be another reason to go this route. I've seen a few corporate systems that got re-written because it was written in VB6 or some other legacy language/framework. Since it was a monolithic app, it has to be done all at once. This always takes far longer than scheduled with many mistakes, much stress, and panic from all stakeholders. My point is, at the very least, this allows you to rewrite a system, one service at a time - phasing it out slowly and steadily, rather than replacing everything at once.
I suppose it's up to the culture and willingness of the people that work there to learn and apply themselves to maintaining such a solution. Traditionally I've found (in the ones I've worked for, at least) that companies tend to stubbornly stick to a particular stack. Introducing new technology is seen as an overhead (which it is!) since it will impair onboarding time for existing developers.
The example was more of an aside - an additional benefit to suggest that even if all the tech you use is the same, this could be another reason to go this route. I've seen a few corporate systems that got re-written because it was written in VB6 or some other legacy language/framework. Since it was a monolithic app, it has to be done all at once. This always takes far longer than scheduled with many mistakes, much stress, and panic from all stakeholders. My point is, at the very least, this allows you to rewrite a system, one service at a time - phasing it out slowly and steadily, rather than replacing everything at once.
Sure, it makes sense. Strang(edit: l)er vines pattern.
Strangler? Yeah