Share
ReportHello,
Could you provide clear justifications for why the DEV, QA, and UAT environments set up specifically for the Nintex to Power Platform migration should not be repurposed for standard development, testing, and user acceptance activities after the migration is complete?
I’m looking for a comprehensive explanation outlining why it's generally discouraged to continue using the DEV, QA, and UAT environments—originally provisioned specifically for the Nintex to Power Platform migration—as long-term, regular environments for ongoing development, testing, and user acceptance post-migration. What are the potential risks, limitations, or governance concerns associated with reusing these migration-specific environments, and what best practices should be followed instead?
Could you provide clear justifications for why the DEV, QA, and UAT environments set up specifically for the Nintex to Power Platform migration should not be repurposed for standard development, testing, and user acceptance activities after the migration is complete?
I’m looking for a comprehensive explanation outlining why it's generally discouraged to continue using the DEV, QA, and UAT environments—originally provisioned specifically for the Nintex to Power Platform migration—as long-term, regular environments for ongoing development, testing, and user acceptance post-migration. What are the potential risks, limitations, or governance concerns associated with reusing these migration-specific environments, and what best practices should be followed instead?
Could you provide use cases, real-world problems, and examples of what might occur when those environments are reused?
All responses (
Answers (
44,064
