reviewed

Author: enekofb

docs/adrs/0019-feature-user-documentation-maturity.md

@@ -8,34 +8,35 @@ Proposed
 
 ## Context
 
-In the context of a new product feature, we usually close (if not earlier) the delivery by adding its user documentation, that in the
-context of weave gitops is its documentation website https://docs.gitops.weave.works/docs/intro/.  
+In the context of a new product feature, we usually close (if not earlier) its delivery by adding user documentation. In the
+context of Weave GitOps is its [documentation website](https://docs.gitops.weave.works/docs/intro/).  
 
-The user documentation helps any user onboarding to a new feature to
-- understand which problem address
-- how to get started with the feature or day 1 experience
-- how to do other advance scenario, operations or day 2 experience
-among other concerns. 
+The user documentation helps a user onboarding to a new feature, among other concerns, to:
+- Understand the value the feature provides to the user. 
+- How to get started or day 1 experience.
+- How to do other scenario like operations or day 2 experience.
 
-However, in the context of adopting a new technology or solution, there is usually a process to build up confidence
-and uses cases to help managing the different risks associated. In the context of our documentation, we dont 
-provide consistently information to user helping them to manage those risks and expectations so we leave 
-to them to form an opinion and define how that adoption iterinerary looks like without guidance.
+However, in the context of adopting a new solution, there is usually a concern of building up confidence and managing risks.
+This concern, is not necessarily consistently addressed in our documentation, where sometimes we flag that info with documentation 
+or a warning signaling it.
 
-That opens two scenarios:
+![alpha-warning.png](images%2Falpha-warning.png)
 
-1. if there is a match between what the user expectations is about maturity and the actual feature mature there wont be an missalingment. 
-2. if not, that misalignment would show up in different ways: from "hey, this feature is not yet super mature" or "the app is crashing in production impacting XYZ revenue" 
+Therefore, we leave the user to form an opinion and define how that adoption itinerary looks like without guidance. That opens
+(at least) two scenarios:
 
-There are some potential actions to do here:
+1. If there is a match between user expectations about maturity is and the actual maturity, there wont be an misalignment. 
+2. If not, that misalignment would show up in different ways: from "hey, this feature is not yet super mature" or "the app is crashing in production impacting XYZ revenue". 
 
-1. Do nothing, this is not an important decision to take or we dont want to take it because XYZ
+This ADR decides on the previous problem statement based on the following potential next steps:
+
+1. Do nothing, this is not an important decision to take or we dont want to take it because XYZ.
 2. Do something acknowledging that we want to guide users in their adoption journey. In case we think we should do something:
       1. Follow a similar approach to [api version lifecycle](./0014-api-versioning-lifecycle.md)
          - maturity levels of Alpha, Beta, Stable with a baseline definition of these levels
          - guidelines on how to communicate the maturity without disincentive users to try out
          - other points
-      2. Another approach
+      2. Another approach TBD
 
 ## Decision