Excavating intent from abandoned code. Students learn to date, read, and diagnose dead software using forensic techniques — git blame as stratigraphy, commit messages as inscriptions, dependency graphs as tool inventories — then confront the ethics of reviving someone else's abandoned work.
What you will do
Pick a dead codebase — someone's abandoned project, its last commit gathering dust — and spend a semester working out what it was, how it worked, why it died, and whether it deserves to come back.
You will learn forensic techniques that no other course teaches: readinggit blame the way a geologist reads rock strata, dating a project by its dependency manifest, reconstructing a team's working culture from the messages they left behind. By week 8 you will know your dig site better than its original authors did. By week 12 you will present it to an audience who has never seen it, and your job is to make them care.
Who it is for
Postgraduate students who have already shipped software and inherited somebody else's. The course assumes you can read an unfamiliar codebase in at least one language and work independently for twelve weeks on a single object of study; it assumes no archaeology, no historiography and no prior exposure to conservation theory, all of which are taught here.
It is an 8000-level course because the work is interpretive rather than procedural. There is no correct answer to what killed a project, only a reading you can evidence and defend — and the assessment is weighted accordingly, toward argument rather than output.
How it is taught
Each week pairs a lecture with a seminar. The lecture supplies the method and its literature — the course borrows openly from archaeological stratigraphy, from conservation ethics, and from oral-history practice, because each has spent a century on problems software has spent twenty years rediscovering. The seminar is where you apply that week's method to your own dig site and defend the result to the room.
Where to go next
Digs
Twelve weeks, twelve forensic methods, one dig site of your choosing.
Lectures
The method behind each week, and the real projects it was learned on.
Assessment
Three pieces: a survey, a diagnosis, and an exhibit.
People
Who teaches the course and how to reach them.
Try the method
Read a section
Run git log --format=%ai on any repository and paste the output. This phases the history the way week 2 teaches — construction, maintenance, decay — and names the boundary between the last active period and the silence.
Everything happens in your browser. Nothing is uploaded, and nothing is stored.
oldestnewest
- Construction
- Maintenance
- Decay
- Commits
- Range
- Peak month
- Boundary
- Silent since
- Verdict
The verdict applies week 1's criterion — no human commit in eighteen months. It is a starting hypothesis, not a diagnosis; weeks 3 to 8 are where you find out whether it holds.
