Feature flag changelogs + naming practices

[internetisaiah]

Pull Request/Issue Resolution

Description of Change:

Adding documentation for feature flag changelogs. This also includes updates to the recommended naming practices for feature flags.

• Ticket: BD-3005
• Ticket: BD-2991

Additional notes

Are the label names too late to change in the UI? If not, I'd suggest changing the word "Action" to "Step" (or similar). From what I can tell the word "Action" doesn't show up when creating or editing a feature flag, so the word feels a bit hard to describe. Furthermore, it requires the end-user to learn a new piece of vocab instead of recycling Braze vocab they may already be familiar with. Let me know your thoughts!

Is this change associated with a Braze feature/product release?

• Yes (Date: N/A)
• No

---

✔️ Pull Request Checklist

• Check that you haven't removed any images (replacing an image with an updated one of the same name is fine), as this breaks the French site
• Check that all links work.
• Ensure you have completed our Contributors License Agreement.
• Tag @josh-mccrowell-braze and @internetisaiah as a reviewer when your work is done and ready to be reviewed for merge. Are you an internal product manager? Reference the internal reviewing chart to tag the appropriate reviewer.
• If the documentation involves a 1) paid SKU, 2) a third party, 3) SMS, 4) AI, or 5) privacy, ensure that Ana Teresa Serafino on the Legal team has signed off.
• Tag others as reviewers as necessary.
• If you have modified any links, be sure to add redirects to assets > js > broken_redirect_list.js

⭐ Helpful Wiki Shortcuts

• Writing Style Guide
• Image Style Guide
• Styling Test Page

❗ ATTN: For PR Reviewers

• Read our Reviewing a PR page for more on our reviewing suggestions.
• Read our Previewing Documentation page to see how to check the deployment.
  • Preview all changes in the linked Vercel environment by clicking the preview link in the vercel-bot comment in your PR.

❗ ATTN: Internal Reviewing Chart

Work at Braze and not sure who to tag for review?
Before tagging @josh-mccrowell-braze or @internetisaiah for a general review, reference the following chart to see if a specific product vertical/reviewer applies to your pull request.

Reviewer	Product Vertical
@josh-mccrowell-braze	Monolith Deployments Quality Infrastructure Platform Infrastructure Datalake SDKs Currents
@internetisaiah	Developer Guide Technology partners Channels
@bre-fitzgerald	Intelligence In-App Messages Channels Frontend Infrastructure & Experience (FIX)
@lydia-xie	Ingestion Core Objects Core Messaging Messaging Experience Message Components Email (Composition and Infrastructure) (tag @rachel-feinberg for Liquid use cases)
@rachel-feinberg	Customer Lifecycle, Identity and Permissions SMS User Targeting Reporting

[bkasman95]

hey @internetisaiah this shouldn't be in the Canvas component section - this is for feature flag rollouts. otherwise looks good.

can we add this to https://www.braze.com/docs/developer_guide/platform_wide/feature_flags/create/

[internetisaiah]

@bkasman95 , I migrated the content over to the correct doc 👍🏽 . I also ended up cleaning up the dev guide doc since the headings felt clunky with the new content.

Once you give this a quick review, I'll merge the changes!

[bkasman95]

these look good to me!

[bkasman95]

added @davidbielik to give a quick review, but looks good to me!

[davidbielik]

is this one required for experiments only?

[internetisaiah]

Technically I didn't change anything here, I just changed the format from a list to a table. But I'm happy to tweak in this PR if needed?

[davidbielik]

@bkasman95 can you find out when each of the two permissions is required?

[internetisaiah]

@davidbielik and @bkasman95 , I'm going to merge this for now since this is what's on the existing doc. Once you find out this info @bkasman95 , please create another ticket for our team to update this! Thanks!

[davidbielik]

left a few items of feedback, but lgtm