Which approach best enforces consistent infrastructure configuration by treating deployments as code committed to version control and reviewed before apply?

Which approach best enforces consistent infrastructure configuration by treating deployments as code committed to version control and reviewed before apply?

• A. Replace the compute instance type with a larger version to reduce the number of required deployments
• B. Implement a ticketing workflow that makes engineers submit a ticket before manually provisioning and configuring a resource
• C. Implement a provisioning pipeline that deploys infrastructure configurations committed to your version control system following code reviews
• D. Implement a checklist that engineers can follow when configuring compute instances

Answer: (C)

Treating infrastructure changes as code that lives in version control and is only applied after a review is the hallmark of reliable, reproducible deployments. When a provisioning pipeline pulls configurations that are committed to the version control system and enforces code reviews before applying them, every change is captured in a central, auditable history and vetted by peers. This approach ensures consistency across environments, minimizes human error, and enables safe rollback if something goes wrong. It also supports automation, so deployments are repeatable and scalable rather than ad hoc. The other options miss that combination of automation, version control, and governance. Replacing a compute instance type aims at resource sizing rather than enforcing a consistent, codified deployment process. A ticketing workflow that leads to manual provisioning introduces drift and lacks the automatic checks and balances of a code-based pipeline. A checklist is a manual guide that, while helpful, relies on individual discipline and does not enforce changes through version-controlled, reviewed code or automated apply steps.

Treating infrastructure changes as code that lives in version control and is only applied after a review is the hallmark of reliable, reproducible deployments. When a provisioning pipeline pulls configurations that are committed to the version control system and enforces code reviews before applying them, every change is captured in a central, auditable history and vetted by peers. This approach ensures consistency across environments, minimizes human error, and enables safe rollback if something goes wrong. It also supports automation, so deployments are repeatable and scalable rather than ad hoc.

The other options miss that combination of automation, version control, and governance. Replacing a compute instance type aims at resource sizing rather than enforcing a consistent, codified deployment process. A ticketing workflow that leads to manual provisioning introduces drift and lacks the automatic checks and balances of a code-based pipeline. A checklist is a manual guide that, while helpful, relies on individual discipline and does not enforce changes through version-controlled, reviewed code or automated apply steps.