Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Google Professional Cloud Developer Exam - Topic 2 Question 87 Discussion

You are a developer at a large organization. Your team uses Git for source code management (SCM). You want to ensure that your team follows Google-recommended best practices to manage code to drive higher rates of software delivery. Which SCM process should your team use?
D) Each developer creates a branch for their own work, commits their changes to their branch, and merges their code into the main branch after peer review.
A) Each group of developers creates a feature branch from the main branch for their work, commits their changes to their branch, and merges their code into the main branch before each major release.
B) Each developer commits their code to the main branch before each product release, conducts testing, and rolls back if integration issues are detected.
C) Each group of developers copies the repository, commits their changes to their repository, and merges their code into the main repository before each product release.

Google Professional Cloud Developer Exam - Topic 2 Question 87 Discussion

Actual exam question for Google's Professional Cloud Developer exam
Question #: 87
Topic #: 2
[All Professional Cloud Developer Questions]

You are a developer at a large organization. Your team uses Git for source code management (SCM). You want to ensure that your team follows Google-recommended best practices to manage code to drive higher rates of software delivery. Which SCM process should your team use?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

by Francesco at Jul 08, 2024, 10:07 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium Professional Cloud Developer Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Niesha
9 months ago
Wait, can we really trust these methods? What if they lead to more conflicts?
upvoted 0 times
...
Elke
9 months ago
A is definitely the best practice according to Google!
upvoted 0 times
...
Salome
9 months ago
I thought we were supposed to avoid merging directly into main?
upvoted 0 times
...
Lindsey
10 months ago
I disagree, D seems better with peer reviews.
upvoted 0 times
...
Glendora
10 months ago
Option A is the way to go! Feature branches are essential.
upvoted 0 times
...
Roselle
10 months ago
I have a vague memory of copying repositories being a bad practice. I think option C is not recommended based on what we learned.
upvoted 0 times
...
Germaine
10 months ago
I recall a similar question about branching strategies, and I think merging after testing is crucial. So, maybe option B could work too?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ciara
10 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like option D might be the best choice since it emphasizes peer review, which we practiced in our last session.
upvoted 0 times
...
My
11 months ago
I remember we discussed the importance of feature branches in our last study group. I think option A aligns with that practice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Matilda
11 months ago
Option D sounds like a good approach to me. Doing individual branches and getting peer review before merging to the main branch seems like a solid way to manage code changes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shay
11 months ago
Hmm, I'm a little unsure about this one. The question mentions Google-recommended best practices, but I'm not totally familiar with those. I'll have to think through the options carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mel
11 months ago
This looks like a pretty straightforward question about Git branching strategies. I think the Google-recommended best practice is to use feature branches, so I'll go with option A.
upvoted 0 times
...
Denny
11 months ago
I'm confident that option A is the right answer here. Creating feature branches, committing to those, and then merging to the main branch is a well-established Git workflow that aligns with industry best practices.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carry
11 months ago
This seems like a pretty standard user management task in Ansible. I'll just follow the instructions carefully, make sure I have all the required files, and run the playbook with the vault password. Shouldn't be too difficult as long as I pay attention to the details.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dorothy
11 months ago
I think Sarah might be right. The basis is usually just the amount the taxpayer paid to acquire the property, which in this case would be the $40,000 cash payment. The mortgage and title insurance are separate costs that wouldn't be included in the basis.
upvoted 0 times
...
Herman
2 years ago
Option D is the way to go. Gotta love those fancy 'change advisory boards' - makes me feel like I'm in a corporate spy movie or something.
upvoted 0 times
...
Martin
2 years ago
Haha, Option A sounds like a recipe for disaster. Committing directly to the main branch? No testing? What could go wrong?
upvoted 0 times
Adelina
2 years ago
Yeah, Option D also sounds good. Having a feature branch for each group's work adds an extra layer of control.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mendy
2 years ago
I agree, Option C seems like a safer approach. Each developer creating their own branch for work.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jani
2 years ago
Option A does sound risky. No testing before committing to the main branch is a bad idea.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Sylvia
2 years ago
I think option A is the most efficient. Committing directly to the main branch before release simplifies the process.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pura
2 years ago
I prefer option C. It allows developers to work independently and merge changes daily.
upvoted 0 times
...
Clorinda
2 years ago
I like Option C. Daily merges into the main branch keep things moving, and it's a good balance between individual work and collaboration.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jovita
2 years ago
Definitely going with Option D. Feature branches and change approvals ensure code quality and reduce integration issues.
upvoted 0 times
Adrianna
2 years ago
I agree, having a separate branch for each feature helps keep things organized.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mozell
2 years ago
It's important to get approval before merging to main to prevent any issues. Option D is the best choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tamra
2 years ago
Option D is the way to go. Feature branches and approvals are key for code quality.
upvoted 0 times
...
Victor
2 years ago
Yes, following best practices like feature branches can really help with software delivery.
upvoted 0 times
...
Georgene
2 years ago
I agree, it's important to have a process in place for code quality.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nichelle
2 years ago
Option D is the way to go. Feature branches and approvals are key.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Della
2 years ago
Option C seems like the way to go. It's important to keep the main branch stable and have developers work on their own branches.
upvoted 0 times
Desirae
2 years ago
Yes, creating branches for each developer's work helps keep the main branch stable and allows for easier code integration.
upvoted 0 times
...
Erinn
2 years ago
I agree, option C is definitely the best practice for managing code in Git.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lorrie
2 years ago
I agree with Cecilia. Option D ensures that changes are approved before merging.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cecilia
2 years ago
I think option D is the best choice.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel