Proposed change to Git LFS page

What does this MR do?

I'm proposing some changes to https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/topics/git/lfs/, primarily for clarity. However, I have:

• Rewritten the intro as a Concept topic type
• Moved the image after the instructions to install LFS on the server and client
• Checked my proposed change through Vale. I improved readability from 8.11 to 7.83.

In addition:

• I'm tempted to add a link to OAuth 2 docs (see Line 60), as I'm pretty sure that'll also work as as an HTTPS credential store.
• I would have changed more titles to avoid "ing" verbs (such as "Using Git LFS" -> "Use Git LFS", but I didn't want to break links, and prefer an MVC.
• Before I set up this MR, I used this procedure to build the doc locally: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-docs/-/blob/main/doc/setup.md

Related issues

Author's checklist

• Optional. Consider taking the GitLab Technical Writing Fundamentals course.
• Follow the:
  • Documentation process.
  • Documentation guidelines.
  • Style Guide.
• If you're adding a new page, add the product tier badge under the H1 topic title.
• If you are a GitLab team member, request a review based on:
  • The documentation page's metadata.
  • The associated Technical Writer.

If you are a GitLab team member and only adding documentation, do not add any of the following labels:

• ~"frontend"
• ~"backend"
• ~"type::bug"
• ~"database"

These labels cause the MR to be added to code verification QA issues.

Reviewer's checklist

Documentation-related MRs should be reviewed by a Technical Writer for a non-blocking review, based on Documentation Guidelines and the Style Guide.

If you aren't sure which tech writer to ask, use roulette or ask in the #docs Slack channel.

• If the content requires it, ensure the information is reviewed by a subject matter expert.
• Technical writer review items:
  • Ensure docs metadata is present and up-to-date.
  • Ensure the appropriate labels are added to this MR.
  • Ensure a release milestone is set.
  • If relevant to this MR, ensure content topic type principles are in use, including:
    • The headings should be something you'd do a Google search for. Instead of Default behavior, say something like Default behavior when you close an issue.
    • The headings (other than the page title) should be active. Instead of Configuring GDK, say something like Configure GDK.
    • Any task steps should be written as a numbered list.
    • If the content still needs to be edited for topic types, you can create a follow-up issue with the docs-technical-debt label.
• Review by assigned maintainer, who can always request/require the reviews above. Maintainer's review can occur before or after a technical writer review.

cc @kpaizee

Hey @mikejang!

Welcome to our community! We're excited to have you here, and can't wait to review this first MR with you!

Thank you for your contribution to GitLab. Please refer to the contribution documentation for an overview of the process.

Did you know about our community forks? Working from there will make your contribution process easier. Please check it out!

When you're ready for a first review, post @gitlab-bot ready. If you know a relevant reviewer(s) (for example, someone that was involved in a related issue), you can also assign them directly with @gitlab-bot ready @user1 @user2.

At any time, if you need help, feel free to post @gitlab-bot help or initiate a mentor session on Discord. Read more on how to get help.

This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.

added 1st contribution Community contribution workflowin dev labels

assigned to @mikejang

added docs-only label

resolved all threads

added 1 commit

• ab3c52b7 - Fix broken link

Compare with previous version

marked this merge request as ready

Since the tests have passed, I've moved this MR from "draft" to "ready".

added devopscreate documentation groupsource code maintenancerefactor typemaintenance labels

added Category:Source Code Management sectiondev labels

requested review from @msedlakjakubowski

added 61 commits

• ab3c52b7...6685a447 - 60 commits from branch gitlab-org:master
• bce60c30 - Merge branch 'master' into 'mjang-proposed-lfs-doc-change'

Compare with previous version

changed milestone to %16.11

approved this merge request

added Technical Writing docsimprovement twfinished workflowin review labels and removed workflowin dev label

requested review from @j.seto and removed review request for @msedlakjakubowski

Hi @msedlakjakubowski ,

GitLab Bot has added the Technical Writing label because a Technical Writer has approved or merged this MR.

This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.

added 1 commit

• d0299272 - Incorporate comments

Compare with previous version

reset approvals from @msedlakjakubowski by pushing to the branch

added 1 commit

• 743ce4fd - Apply 1 suggestion(s) to 1 file(s)

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 73c699d6 - Apply 1 suggestion(s) to 1 file(s)

Compare with previous version

resolved all threads

resolved all threads

added 1 commit

• 99ea2aff - Resolve grammar error

Compare with previous version

resolved all threads

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for 6f9453fb succeeds

	1 Warning
	d0299272: The commit subject must contain at least 3 words. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines.

	1 Message
	This merge request adds or changes documentation files. A review from the Technical Writing team before you merge is recommended. Reviews can happen after you merge.

Documentation review

The following files require a review from a technical writer:

• doc/topics/git/lfs/index.md (Link to current live version)

The review does not need to block merging this merge request. See the:

• Metadata for the *.md files that you've changed. The first few lines of each *.md file identify the stage and group most closely associated with your docs change.
• The Technical Writer assigned for that stage and group.
• Documentation workflows for information on when to assign a merge request for review.

If needed, you can retry the danger-review job that generated this comment.

Generated by Danger

merged

@mikejang, how was your code review experience with this merge request? Please tell us how we can continue to iterate and improve:

1. React with a or a on this comment to describe your experience.
2. Create a new comment starting with @gitlab-bot feedback below, and leave any additional feedback you have for us in the comment.

Subscribe to the GitLab Community Newsletter for contributor-focused content and opportunities to level up.

Thanks for your help!

This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.

@mikejang, congratulations for getting your first MR merged

If this is your first MR against a GitLab project, we'd like to invite and encourage you to self-nominate yourself for First MR Merged swag prize here.

Thank you again for contributing, what's your next contribution going to be?

This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.

mentioned in commit a3b1b45f

added workflowstaging-canary label and removed workflowin review label

added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging-canary label

added workflowproduction label and removed workflowcanary label

added workflowstaging label and removed workflowproduction label

added workflowpost-deploy-db-staging label and removed workflowstaging label

added releasedcandidate label

added releasedpublished label and removed releasedcandidate label