Development-Lifecycle-and-Deployment-Architect Exam Dumps - Salesforce Certified Development Lifecycle and Deployment Architect (WI25)

The advice that a technical architect should provide in a Change Advisory Board meeting is troubleshooting strategies for deployment issues. This is because the Change Advisory Board is responsible for reviewing and approving changes to the IT environment, and the technical architect should provide guidance on how to resolve any potential problems that may arise during the deployment process1. The other options are not relevant for the Change Advisory Board meeting, as they are more related to the requirements analysis, design, or testing phases of the development lifecycle.

The creation and execution of Release Management processes are the responsibility of the Dev/Build Team and the Center of Excellence. The Dev/Build Team is in charge of developing, testing, and deploying the changes to the system, while the Center of Excellence is in charge of defining and managing the best practices, standards, and governance for the system. The Steering Committee is a group of senior stakeholders that provides strategic direction and oversight for the project, but does not create or execute the Release Management processes. The End Users are the people who use the system, but do not create or execute the Release Management processes.

 A and C are the correct answers, as they are the methods that should be used to mitigate the risk of code being overwritten by a large development team in a single developer pro sandbox. A is correct, as providing each developer their own sandbox developer org and implementing a code repository and continuous integration to merge code into the developer pro sandbox can help to isolate the changes, avoid conflicts, and ensure consistency and quality. C is correct, as using a single sandbox and strictly coordinating development across shared components, and implementing a code repository to allow developers to merge code into a common repository can help to manage the changes, prevent overwriting, and ensure version control and integration. B is incorrect, as replacing the developer pro sandbox with a partial copy sandbox is not a method that can mitigate the risk of code being overwritten, as it does not address the issue of multiple developers working on the same components, but only provides a larger data set for testing. D is incorrect, as providing each developer their own sandbox developer org, and implementing managed packages to deploy to the merge is not a method that can mitigate the risk of code being overwritten, as it does not allow for easy updates and modifications, but only creates locked and versioned components. You can learn more about this topic in the Application Lifecycle and Deployment module on Trailhead.

Tracking effort estimates, actuals, and remaining work can help the developer improve their estimation skills and accuracy, which can benefit the project planning and delivery.

 Creating design standards to require help text on all custom fields and custom objects is an option that an Architect should recommend, as it helps to provide context and guidance for the administrators and users on how the fields and objects are used and what they mean. Creating design standards to consistently use the description field on custom fields is also an option that an Architect should recommend, as it helps to document the purpose and function of the fields and make them easier to maintain and understand. Creating design standards to consistently use the description field on custom objects is not an option that an Architect should recommend, as it is not a mandatory field and may not provide enough information for the administrators. Creating design standards with a document to store all custom objects and custom fields is not an option that an Architect should recommend, as it may be difficult to keep the document updated and synchronized with the actual metadata in the org. Creating design standards to require all custom fields on all custom object page layouts is not an option that an Architect should recommend, as it may clutter the user interface and reduce the usability and performance of the application.

Waterfall development methodology has some positive aspects, such as:

Complex processes that will need to be built are thoroughly understood and documented before coding begins, which can reduce the risk of ambiguity and rework.

Milestones, timelines and estimates tend to be more accurate and predictable due to the upfront due diligence, which can help with project management and stakeholder expectations.

 DevPro1 cannot be cloned because it is on a different version from Production, as it was upgraded to preview for the next Salesforce major release two weeks ago. Therefore, the architect should recommend creating a new DevPro2, and migrating metadata from DevPro1. This way, the second work stream can work on the Service Cloud requirements in a separate sandbox, without affecting the Sales Cloud dev team. Asking the second work stream team to work on the same DevPro1 sandbox would create conflicts and dependencies between the two teams, and would not allow them to release at different times. Pushing back on the requirements because adding another work stream will bring some risks with it would not be a good option, as the business needs might be urgent and important.

 The change set performance may depend on the included components, especially if they are complex or have many dependencies. The change set may take more time than usual if it includes changes to permission sets and profiles, as these components require additional validation and processing. The change set may not take more time if it includes field type changes, new custom objects and fields, or other simple components.