Why would a developer clone an Integration Procedure instead of versioning it?

Why would a developer clone an Integration Procedure instead of versioning it?

• A. The new Integration Procedure uses a Cache Block.
• B. The new Integration Procedure it replacing stub data.
• C. The new Integration Procedure will be used independently
• D. The new Integration Procedure is Chainable

Answer: (C)

Cloning an Integration Procedure creates a completely new, standalone asset that starts with the same logic but has its own lifecycle. You clone when you want a separate object you can edit, deploy, and version independently of the original, so it can be used in a different context or evolve without affecting the original IP or its version history. If you versioned, you’d be creating a new version of the same Integration Procedure, preserving prior versions and maintaining references to them for controlled changes. The other options describe internal features or outcomes (such as caching, replacing stub data, or chainability) and don’t explain why you’d want an independent asset.

Cloning an Integration Procedure creates a completely new, standalone asset that starts with the same logic but has its own lifecycle. You clone when you want a separate object you can edit, deploy, and version independently of the original, so it can be used in a different context or evolve without affecting the original IP or its version history. If you versioned, you’d be creating a new version of the same Integration Procedure, preserving prior versions and maintaining references to them for controlled changes. The other options describe internal features or outcomes (such as caching, replacing stub data, or chainability) and don’t explain why you’d want an independent asset.