Courseiva
Design and implement a source control strategymediumMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

AZ-400 Practice Question: Design and implement a source control strategy

Your team uses GitHub for source control and wants to enforce that all pull requests into the main branch require at least two reviewers and must pass a status check from a CI pipeline. Which branch protection rule configurations should you apply?

⚠ Common exam trap

A common mix-up: candidates think requiring signed commits or only status checks is sufficient, but the question explicitly demands both two reviewers and a CI status check, which only option A satisfies.

Answer choices

Why each option matters

Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.

Correct answer & explanation

Require a minimum of 2 reviewers, require status checks to pass before merging

GitHub branch protection rules allow you to require a minimum number of reviewers before merging and to require status checks to pass. By setting 'Require a minimum number of reviewers' to 2 and enabling 'Require status checks to pass before merging', you enforce that every pull request into the main branch must be approved by at least two reviewers and must pass the CI pipeline status check, meeting the stated requirements.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

  • Require a minimum of 2 reviewers, require status checks to pass before merging

    Why this is correct

    This branch protection configuration enforces both mandatory peer review and automated quality gates: at least two reviewers must approve the pull request, and all required status checks (e.g., CI build and test jobs) must pass before merging. This is the correct combination to meet the stated requirements.

  • Require signed commits and status checks

    Why it's wrong here

    While signed commits provide authenticity and integrity guarantees, they do not enforce a minimum number of human reviewers; the scenario explicitly requires at least two reviewers. Moreover, the inclusion of status checks is necessary but not sufficient, making this option incomplete and incorrect.

  • Require status checks to pass, but do not require reviewers

    Why it's wrong here

    Requiring status checks to pass ensures automated validation (CI/tests) succeeds before merge, but it omits the crucial reviewer requirement. Since the scenario mandates a minimum of two reviewers, missing this human approval gate makes the option incorrect.

  • Require a minimum of 2 reviewers, but do not require status checks

    Why it's wrong here

    Setting a minimum of two reviewers satisfies the peer review requirement, but without requiring status checks to pass, the branch can be merged even if CI or test failures exist. The scenario explicitly requires both protections, so this incomplete configuration is incorrect.

About these practice questions

This AZ-400 question is part of Courseiva's 823-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

JA

Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security

Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva

This AZ-400 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Microsoft certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the AZ-400 exam.