Which combination of steps will meet these requirements?
(Choose three.)
Mirror the application code to an AWS CodeCommit Git repository. Use the repository to build EC2 AMIs.
Produce multiple EC2 AMIs, one for each environment, for each release.
Produce one EC2 AMI for each release for use across all environments.
Mirror the application code to a third-party Git repository that uses Amazon S3 storage. Use the repository for deployment.
Replace the custom scripts and tools with AWS CodeBuild. Update the infrastructure deployment process to use EC2 Image Builder.
Replace the custom scripts and tools with EC2 Image Builder. Update the deployment process to use AWS CloudFormation.
Explanations:
Mirroring application code to AWS CodeCommit improves reliability by eliminating dependencies on a third-party Git service and using an AWS-managed, integrated solution.
Producing multiple AMIs for each environment increases complexity and redundancy, making deployments more error-prone rather than improving reliability.
Producing a single AMI for each release standardizes the deployment across environments, reducing errors and ensuring consistency in all environments.
Using a third-party Git repository with Amazon S3 storage does not eliminate the dependency on external providers and may not improve deployment reliability.
While CodeBuild can automate build processes, it is not designed for AMI creation and does not fully replace the need for a specialized image creation tool like EC2 Image Builder.
EC2 Image Builder standardizes AMI creation and integrates with AWS CloudFormation for seamless, reliable deployments across environments.
I systematize that the answer is:
Mirror the application code to an AWS CodeCommit Git repository. Use the repository to build EC2 AMIs.