MENU
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?
Suggested Answer: D
Get Premium Professional Cloud Developer Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
35 comments · newest first
NI
Niesha
11 months ago
Wait, can we really trust these methods? What if they lead to more conflicts?
EL
Elke
11 months ago
A is definitely the best practice according to Google!
SA
Salome
11 months ago
I thought we were supposed to avoid merging directly into main?
LI
Lindsey
11 months ago
I disagree, D seems better with peer reviews.
GL
Glendora
12 months ago
Option A is the way to go! Feature branches are essential.
RO
Roselle
12 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.
GE
Germaine
1 year ago
I recall a similar question about branching strategies, and I think merging after testing is crucial. So, maybe option B could work too?
CI
Ciara
1 year 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.
MY
My
1 year ago
I remember we discussed the importance of feature branches in our last study group. I think option A aligns with that practice.
MA
Matilda
1 year 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.
SH
Shay
1 year 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.
ME
Mel
1 year 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.
DE
Denny
1 year 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.
CA
Carry
1 year 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.
DO
Dorothy
1 year 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.
HE
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.
MA
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?
AD
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.
ME
Mendy
2 years ago
I agree, Option C seems like a safer approach. Each developer creating their own branch for work.
JA
Jani
2 years ago
Option A does sound risky. No testing before committing to the main branch is a bad idea.
SY
Sylvia
2 years ago
I think option A is the most efficient. Committing directly to the main branch before release simplifies the process.
PU
Pura
2 years ago
I prefer option C. It allows developers to work independently and merge changes daily.
CL
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.
JO
Jovita
2 years ago
Definitely going with Option D. Feature branches and change approvals ensure code quality and reduce integration issues.
AD
Adrianna
2 years ago
I agree, having a separate branch for each feature helps keep things organized.
MO
Mozell
2 years ago
It's important to get approval before merging to main to prevent any issues. Option D is the best choice.
TA
Tamra
2 years ago
Option D is the way to go. Feature branches and approvals are key for code quality.
VI
Victor
2 years ago
Yes, following best practices like feature branches can really help with software delivery.
GE
Georgene
2 years ago
I agree, it's important to have a process in place for code quality.
NI
Nichelle
2 years ago
Option D is the way to go. Feature branches and approvals are key.
DE
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.
DE
Desirae
2 years ago
Yes, creating branches for each developer's work helps keep the main branch stable and allows for easier code integration.
ER
Erinn
2 years ago
I agree, option C is definitely the best practice for managing code in Git.
LO
Lorrie
2 years ago
I agree with Cecilia. Option D ensures that changes are approved before merging.
CE
Cecilia
2 years ago
I think option D is the best choice.