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

#364 - Review SEGAS-00003 Minimal documentation set for a product #391

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 14, 2024

Conversation

jeff-horton-ho-sas
Copy link
Contributor

After discussion in the ways of working guild meeting on 7th March 2024 we agreed that a lot of the incident management information is included in the product description section. This is now called out in that section, and the incident management has been rewritten to be about runbooks for expected tasks.

Content change

I can confirm:

  • Content does not include any code or configuration changes (excluding frontmatter information)
  • Content meets the content standards
    e.g. Writing a principle and Writing a standard
  • Content is suitable to open source, i.e.:
    • Content does not relate to unreleased gov policy
    • Content does not refer to anti-fraud mechanisms
    • Content does not include sensitive business logic
  • Last updated date for content is correct

After discussion in the ways of working guild meeting on 7th March 2024 we agreed that a lot of the incident management information is included in the product description section. This is now called out in that section, and the incident management has been rewritten to be about runbooks for expected tasks.
@jeff-horton-ho-sas jeff-horton-ho-sas self-assigned this Mar 7, 2024
@jeff-horton-ho-sas jeff-horton-ho-sas requested a review from a team as a code owner March 7, 2024 15:55
@jeff-horton-ho-sas jeff-horton-ho-sas linked an issue Mar 7, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
1 task
Copy link
Contributor

@daniel-ac-martin daniel-ac-martin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks good to me.

My only question is, did we want to explicitly call out disaster recovery?

Co-authored-by: Robert Deniszczyc <[email protected]>
@edhamiltonHO edhamiltonHO merged commit 52e8648 into main Mar 14, 2024
3 checks passed
@edhamiltonHO edhamiltonHO deleted the 364-disambiguate-l2-docs-from-sdp branch April 10, 2024 08:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Disambiguate L2 docs from SDP?
4 participants