ug: include personas

[vanmaegima]

PR Template and Checklist

Please complete as much as possible to speed up the reviewing process.

Readiness and adding reviewers as appropriate is required.

All PRs should be reviewed by a technical writer/documentation team and a peer.
If effecting customers—which is a majority of content changes—a member of Customer Success must also review.

Readiness

• Merge (pending reviews)
• Merge after date or event
• Draft

Overview

This includes a doc view based on personas for easier customer interaction.

Checklist

• Run spelling and grammar check, preferably with linter.
• Avoid changing any header associated with a link/reference.
• Step through instructions (or ask someone to do so).
• Review for wordiness
• Match tone and style of page/section.
• Run make linkcheck.
• View HTML in a browser to check rendering.
• Use semantic newlines.
• follow best practices for commits.
  • Descriptive title written in the imperative.
  • Include brief overview of QA steps taken.
  • Mention any related issues numbers.
  • End message with sign off/DCO line (-s, --signoff).
  • Sign commit with your gpg key (-S, --gpg-sign).
  • Squash commits if needed.
• Request PR review by a technical writer and at least one peer.

Comments

Any thing else that a maintainer/reviewer should know.
This could include potential issues, rational for approach, etc.

[vanmaegima]

@angolini I've tried to address your comments from the first PR.

[kprosise]

LGTM.

[kprosise]

Note regarding build failure: Issue have been fixed (and was unrelated to the PR).

[doanac]

Docs for 64c004e are browsable at: https://ci.foundries.io/projects/fio-docs/builds/2635/docs/artifacts/html/index.html

[angolini]

Some concepts are still not clear to me, but I don't have anything against this doc so let's LGTM

[angolini]

I think I prefer "ticket creation" over escalation here

[vanmaegima]

In this case, everybody can create tickets, however we need a main point of contact on their end to escalate information.
(I know this is not clear and all bullets need rework, but for now I'm just moving internal docs as is to this page)

[kprosise]

@vanmaegima It is fine by me to go ahead and merge this as soon as you are ready.

[vanmaegima]

@kprosise we're holding on this one a bit more to get more internal inputs.

[kprosise]

@vanmaegima did we want to keep this open, or should we close it? I am fine either way.