I addressed this issue as part of this thread on SOX compliance but here are the highlights around governance
We've set up 2 separate server environments, QA and prod with separate data sources
All workflows are developed and tested in our(IT and business) local machines and then published to the QA server for business validation
All workflows are stored in a source-control system throughout the lifecycle
All workflows, whether developed by our IT staff or by the business, are reviewed by IT to ensure adherence to corp standards
All workflows go through documented QA/UAT process before promotion.
Any workflow promotion or change to the configuration on the prod server goes through our change management procedure.
Access to prod is tightly controlled and monitored. Only admins can access the server. The Gallery, of course can be accessed in read-only by the users.
All queries from the Alteryx server are directed to stored procedures on a link server.
These procedures track usage information such as user info, execution time, etc
All procedures are strictly parameterized, to control data flow in both directions
Write-procedures go through our DB acceptance procedure
All of this is documented and tracked
To answer your specific question...Any changes to existing workflows are put through QA in the QA environment and then are pushed to production.
@danilang I hear you but when you compare with Tableau, its quite different. With Tableau, you buy server and that license allows you to have a test server with the same key. Its quite nice!
