Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Tweak wording around experimental feature flags (Khepri) #12286

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 12, 2024

Conversation

michaelklishin
Copy link
Member

This updates Khepri FF description to be more correct and to the point.

It also tweaks the management UI copywriting so
that it does not recommend against the use of
Khepri in production as it is much more mature
in 4.0.

This updates Khepri FF description to be more correct
and to the point.

It also tweaks the management UI copywriting so
that it does not recommend against the use of
Khepri in production as it is much more mature
in 4.0.
@michaelklishin michaelklishin merged commit ad7c58a into main Sep 12, 2024
240 checks passed
@michaelklishin michaelklishin deleted the mk-4.0-khepri-ff-wording branch September 12, 2024 13:09

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could we change the wording to
"Feature flags listed below are optional, these are new features to this release and will not be automatically enabled. Once enabled Khepri cannot be disabled. "
Any more wording that this gives the user a reason not to use Khepri. Sometimes less is more ;-)
The term 'experimental' in itself is enough of a reason for users to stay away.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@HowardTwine most of the team have "mob-programmed" to arrive at the following wording changes #12294. There will be some doc guide changes of a similar kind.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants