Independence Day Deal! Unlock 25% OFF Today – Limited-Time Offer - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Microsoft Exam AZ-400 Topic 5 Question 93 Discussion

Actual exam question for Microsoft's AZ-400 exam
Question #: 93
Topic #: 5
[All AZ-400 Questions]

Note: This question is part of a series of questions that present the same scenario. Each question in the series contains a unique solution thatmight meet the stated goals. Some question sets might have more than one correct solution, while others might not have a correct solution.

After you answer a question in this section, you will NOT be able to return to it. As a result, these questions willnot appear in the review screen.

Your company uses Azure DevOps to manage the build and release processes for applications.

You use a Git repository for applications source control.

You need to implement a pull request strategy that reduces the historyvolume in the master branch.

Solution: You implement a pull request strategy that uses an explicit merge.

Does this meet the goal?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

Contribute your Thoughts:

Alfreda
1 months ago
I bet the person who came up with this solution has never had to deal with a tangled commit history. It's like trying to untangle a plate of spaghetti by adding more spaghetti!
upvoted 0 times
...
Hana
1 months ago
This is like trying to clean up your room by shoving everything in the closet. Sure, the master branch might look tidier, but the real mess is just hidden away. I think we need a more elegant solution here.
upvoted 0 times
Salena
11 days ago
User 3: I agree with Salena, we need a better solution
upvoted 0 times
...
Catarina
13 days ago
User 2: B) No
upvoted 0 times
...
Laticia
21 days ago
User 1: A) Yes
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Sueann
2 months ago
Wait, so we're trying to reduce the history volume, but this solution involves an explicit merge? Isn't that just going to make the history even more convoluted? I'm not convinced this is the right approach.
upvoted 0 times
Mireya
3 days ago
User 4: Let's discuss some alternative strategies to see what might work better.
upvoted 0 times
...
Verlene
5 days ago
User 3: I think we should explore other options before implementing this solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Glen
1 months ago
User 2: Maybe we should consider a different pull request strategy to achieve our goal.
upvoted 0 times
...
Weldon
1 months ago
User 1: I agree, an explicit merge might not be the best way to reduce history volume.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lawrence
2 months ago
Hmm, I'm not so sure about this. Wouldn't an explicit merge lead to a more complex and cluttered commit history? I'd want to explore other options that might be more effective at reducing the history volume.
upvoted 0 times
Desire
1 months ago
User 2: I agree, we should explore other options to reduce the history volume.
upvoted 0 times
...
Amie
1 months ago
User 1: I think an explicit merge might make the commit history more cluttered.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lynelle
2 months ago
I'm not sure, but I think the answer is A) Yes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Solange
2 months ago
Implementing an explicit merge for the pull request strategy seems like a good way to reduce the history volume in the master branch. I think this solution would meet the goal.
upvoted 0 times
Annmarie
1 months ago
User 3: A) Yes
upvoted 0 times
...
Teri
2 months ago
User 2: B) No
upvoted 0 times
...
Alpha
2 months ago
User 1: A) Yes
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Marylin
2 months ago
I agree with Hector, explicit merge can help reduce history volume in the master branch.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hector
3 months ago
I think the solution using an explicit merge will meet the goal.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77