Which step should be taken after pulling the latest changes in a defect branch?

After pulling the latest changes in a defect branch, it is essential to conduct a comprehensive review and verification process to maintain the integrity of the code and ensure that the defect is properly addressed.

Conducting a peer review of changes allows team members to evaluate the modifications made, ensuring that they not only resolve the defect but also adhere to coding standards and best practices. This collaborative review helps identify any potential issues that the original developer may have overlooked.

Running all executable specifications for the release is equally important as it verifies that all functionalities are working as intended. This step serves to confirm that the new changes do not introduce new bugs or regressions within the existing functionality, which is critical for maintaining system reliability.

Moreover, ensuring manual verification by a quality analyst adds an additional layer of assurance. QA professionals typically have a wider perspective on the application and can perform exploratory testing, which can uncover issues that automated tests might miss.

Taking all these steps combined—peer review, execution of specifications, and manual verification—ensures a thorough validation process, thereby optimizing the quality and stability of the codebase before it is merged or released. Consequently, choosing the option that includes all of these steps reflects a best practice approach in software development and quality assurance.