Note: Doc team updates the current version of the documentation and the
two previous versions (n-2), but we address *only high-priority, or
customer-reported issues* for -2 releases in support.
Describe the changes in the doc and link to your dev story:

1. - [x] Mandatory: Add the required version to the Fix version/s field.

2. - [x] Mandatory: Choose the type of documentation change or review.

• [x] We need to update to an existing topic

• [ ] We need to add a new document to an existing section

• [ ] We need a whole new section; this is a function not
  documented before and doesn't belong in any current section

• [ ] We need an Operator Advisory review and approval

• [ ] We need a z-Stream (Errata) Advisory and Release note for
  MCE and/or ACM

3. - [x] Mandatory: Find the link to where the documentation update
should go and add it to the recommended changes. You can either use the
published doc or the staged repo for this step:

Note: As the feature and doc is understood, this recommendation may
change. If this is new documentation, link to the section where you think
it should be placed.

Customer Portal published version

https://access.redhat.com/articles/7120842 

Doc staged repo within the ACM Workspace:
https://github.com/stolostron/rhacm-docs

4. - [x] Mandatory for GA content:

• [x] Add steps, the diff, known issue, and/or other important
  conceptual information in the following space:

The "Application Lifecycle Management" section of the support matrix documents doesn't have anything to explain the headings. This is leading to some confusion about what they mean, especially when it comes to licensing around items such as ACM, ACMV, OKE, and OpenShift GitOps.

The headings appear to relate more to "actions" rather than software/operators and I think this is leading to confusion. For instance, there are two headings around GitOps titled "View application GitOps" and "Register GitOps to deploy" that are shown as "ticked" for OKE. But the context is confusing as other documents cover "gitops" more generically and refer specifically to the OpenShift GitOps operator (for instance in this document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f7iE1Y-RtAucZ3Dse0p8l_68oKkTxl2lOPHbgrHmkTk/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.pcfpgdv4vsll). These suggest that OpenShift GitOps (the operator itself) may be more limited when it comes to working with OKE and RHACM. However the matrix has GitOps actions showing as OK.

I'll admit, I'm not totally clear on this so I can't say what should be there, just that it likely needs an update to reflect our more complex SKU setup with the introduction of OKE and ACM-V concepts over the last few quarters.

Also, the fact that all items are ticked as OK suggests that maybe the level of granularity may not needed anymore and we should focus on explaining the operator and/or layered product rather than the more broad actions that may come from the product or from an upstream offering (ie argo via a helm chart).

• [x] *Add Required access level *(example, *Cluster
  Administrator*) for the user to complete the task:

All users

• [x] Add verification at the end of the task, how does the user
  verify success (a command to run or a result to see?)

The Matrix answers the questions more clearly.

• [ ] Add link to dev story here:

5. - [N/A] Mandatory for bugs: What is the diff? Clearly define what the
problem is, what the change is, and link to the current documentation. Only
use this for a documentation bug.

Not a bug