Salesforce Development-Lifecycle-and-Deployment-Architect - Salesforce Certified Development Lifecycle and Deployment Architect (SP25)

The best practice is to fix the issues in the development sandbox, migrate them to the testing sandbox, and deploy to production after testing. This ensures that the development and testing environments are in sync and that the changes are properly tested before going to production. Fixing the issues in the testing environment and deploying them to production may introduce errors or conflicts, as the development environment may not have the same changes. Fixing the issues in the test environment and migrating them to the development sandbox may also cause errors or conflicts, as the development environment may have other changes that are not ready for testing.

The advantages of the package development model are improving team development and collaboration, facilitating automated testing and continuous integration, and significantly reducing the need for manually tracking changes. The package development model allows the developers to work on modular and reusable components that can be easily tested and deployed. The package development model does not eliminate the need of using change sets, as they can still be used for deploying non-packaged components or metadata. The package development model does not provide its own source control, but rather relies on external source control systems such as Git.

A source control tool provides the ability for distributed teams to work in isolation, as they can create branches and merge their changes later. It also provides the ability to backup code/configuration changes, as they can be stored in a remote repository and retrieved if needed.

Following an ALM process can help avoid defects from being deployed to production, by ensuring that the code is tested and validated in different environments before reaching the end users. It can also help release new features on a consistent schedule, by establishing a clear roadmap and timeline for the development and deployment phases. Moreover, it can help prevent existing working functionality from stopping, by implementing backup and rollback strategies, as well as monitoring and troubleshooting tools. Training new users after each minor and major release is not a benefit of ALM, but rather a best practice for user adoption and change management. Defining metrics for application development project success is not a benefit of ALM, but rather a part of the project management and evaluation process.

The architect should recommend backing up the existing metadata using the ANT Migration Tool. To roll back deployment, deploy again to production using backed up metadata. This strategy allows the team to restore the previous state of the production org in case of any issues with the deployment. Creating a sandbox from production to take the backup of existing metadata is not necessary and may take longer time. Using destructivechanges.xml to delete new components is not a reliable way to roll back deployment, as it may not remove all the dependencies and references. Manually deleting new components is also not a feasible option, as it may be error-prone and time-consuming.

The org development model is a traditional approach that uses sandboxes as the primary development environments. It relies on tools such as change sets, the Ant Migration Tool, or the Metadata API to deploy changes between orgs. One of the benefits of this model is that it allows automated deployment, meaning that the deployment process can be scripted and executed without manual intervention. This can save time and reduce errors. Another benefit of this model is that it allows automated sandbox provisioning, meaning that the creation and configuration of sandboxes can be done programmatically using the Sandbox API or the Salesforce CLI. This can help maintain consistency and alignment across different environments. Automated defect fixing and automated change tracking are not characteristics of the org development model, but rather of the package development model, which uses source code as the source of truth and supports source tracking and automated testing.

The best deployment tool for UC to use to manage their deployment process in an automated fashion is the Force.com Migration Tool, as it is a command-line tool that uses the Metadata API to deploy components from one org to another, and can be integrated with version control systems and continuous integration servers. Option A is not a good choice, as Workbench is a web-based tool that does not support automation or scripting. Option C is not a good choice, as Change Sets are a point-and-click tool that require manual steps to create and deploy. Option D is not a good choice, as Force.com IDE is a desktop tool that does not support automation or scripting.

The recommended strategy for deploying a large volume of metadata is to identify metadata dependencies, create logical groupings, and deploy in the right order. This can help avoid errors and ensure a smooth deployment process.

 Generating a code review checklist to ensure consistency between reviews and different reviewers and conducting a review that combines human efforts and automatic checks by the tool to detect all flaws are two recommended practices to follow when conducting secure code reviews, as they can help improve the quality and security of the code and reduce the risk of vulnerabilities or errors. Focusing on the aggregated reviews to save time and effort, to remove the need to continuously monitor each meaningful change is not a good practice, as it can miss important details or changes that can affect the code functionality or security. Using the code review software as the tool to flag which developer has committed the errors, so the developer can improve is not a constructive way of conducting code reviews, as it can create a blame culture and discourage collaboration and learning. See Secure Coding Guidelines for more details.

The best option for the new BU is to use a new stand-alone Salesforce org, not integrated with the others. This will allow the new BU to have flexibility in their business processes, without affecting or being affected by the other BUs. Since the new BU does not share customers with the other BUs, there is no need to integrate with the customer 360-degree view org, which would add complexity and cost. Deploying the new BU in the customer 360-degree view org is not a good idea, as it would create confusion and duplication of data, as well as limit the customization options for the new BU. Using the same Salesforce org of another BU that shares geographical localization with the new BU is also not a good idea, as it would create conflicts and dependencies between the two BUs, as well as reduce the performance and security of the org. Using a new Salesforce org for the new BU, and customizing integration so that it reads and writes customer information from the customer data org is unnecessary and inefficient, as the new BU does not need to access or update the customer data of the other BUs.