The permits bureau still maintains a mix of legacy and SDK-style SQL Database Projects and wants one standard. Which decision should the SQL AI developer recommend?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
SDK-style projects are the modern blueprint binder for permits schemas—standardize on them so every team builds and ships the same way.
Full Explanation
The permits bureau still maintains a mix of legacy and SDK-style SQL Database Projects and wants one standard. The SQL AI developer should recommend standardizing new municipal database work on SDK-style SQL Database Projects for consistent CI/CD tooling. SDK-style projects align with modern build validation, packaging, and pipeline tasks that DP-800 emphasizes for deploying database solutions. Converging permits schema work onto that standard reduces dual-tooling cost and makes branching policies, PR builds, and dacpac releases uniform across teams.
Forbidding SDK-style projects and keeping only unsupported legacy formats forever fails directionally: it freezes the bureau on weaker CI integration instead of the current standard. Abandoning database projects and applying production DDL by chat transcript fails change control—chat is not a reviewable model and cannot drive repeatable deploys. Storing schema exclusively as screenshots in a shared drive fails as non-executable documentation; screenshots cannot build, validate, or publish a database.
Exam caveat: when asked for a municipal standard going forward, prefer SDK-style SQL Database Projects. Legacy may exist during migration, but “forbid SDK” or “replace projects with chat/screenshots” are anti-patterns, not answers.
Operational check: create a new permits schema change as an SDK-style SQL Database Project, wire PR build validation and a controlled dacpac deploy to test, and deprecate new work on legacy project formats. Document a conversion path for remaining legacy projects so the bureau does not accumulate a third parallel practice.