Complete Development-Lifecycle-and-Deployment-Architect Salesforce Materials

To ensure that bugs found in production are more easily analyzed in the full sandbox, the architect should recommend to refresh the full sandbox after every deployment in production, and to perform the same process in the sandbox before any deployment in production. This way, the full sandbox will be in sync with the production org and will have the same metadata and code. Creating a daily process of copying new and changed data in production to the full sandbox is not necessary, as the full sandbox already has a copy of the production data. Performing a Refresh Data in the full sandbox is not possible, as this option is only available for partial copy and developer pro sandboxes.

The development model that is optimized for this need is to use unlocked packages to deploy the global code and allow each country to create its customized unlocked package extensions. This model can help maintain the global standardization and consistency of the code, while also providing the flexibility and autonomy for each region to customize some aspects of the code for their specific needs. Unlocked packages are a type of second-generation packaging that can be created and installed using the Salesforce CLI or APIs, and can be upgraded or uninstalled as needed. Unlocked package extensions are a type of unlocked packages that can depend on and extend another unlocked package or a managed package. See Unlocked Packages for more details.

 A is the correct answer, as generating a destructivechanges.xml file and deploying the package via the Force.com Migration Tool is the best way to manage the deletions of metadata components across sandbox environments and production with minimal impact on other work streams. A destructivechanges.xml file is a special file that specifies the components to be deleted from an org, and can be deployed using the Force.com Migration Tool, which is a command-line tool that uses the Metadata API to retrieve and deploy metadata components. This method can help to automate and streamline the deletion process, as well as ensure consistency and accuracy across the environments. B is incorrect, as performing deletes manually in a sandbox and then deploying a change set to production is not a good way to manage the deletions, as it can introduce errors and inconsistencies, as well as require additional steps and permissions. C is incorrect, as assigning business analysts to perform the deletes and splitting up the work between them is not a good way to manage the deletions, as it can create confusion and complexity, as well as lack of coordination and integration. D is incorrect, as deleting the components in production and then refreshing all sandboxes to receive the changes is not a good way to manage the deletions, as it can disrupt the production environment and the ongoing development and testing activities in the sandboxes. You can learn more about this topic in the Deploy Changes with the Force.com Migration Tool unit on Trailhead.

 To address the bug in production, the architect should recommend the following approaches: Investigate potential data impacts, fix the bug in a hotfix branch, and seek stakeholder approval for the hotfix. Investigating the data impacts can help assess the severity and scope of the bug, and determine the best course of action to mitigate any data loss or corruption. Fixing the bug in a hotfix branch can help isolate the change and avoid introducing any other changes from the current sprint. Seeking stakeholder approval for the hotfix can help ensure compliance with the regulatory requirements and governance policies.