[bisq-network/bisq-docs] Produce a 'getting started' guide (#45)

[Chris Beams]

@m52go, this looks great now, and I think we're close to ready to merge. My last suggestions:

 - [ ] Take a final full read over the document. Read it aloud to yourself if you haven't done this already, and notice where things don't flow well or sound pleasant. There are a few passages like this that I found on my latest read, but I'm a bit pressed for time right now and can't comment on each of them.

 - [ ] I'm glad to hear you'd like to write the Securing your Wallet guide. As you mentioned above, we shouldn't merge this with it that link being a 404, so what you could do is (a) add a placeholder doc as part of this pull request, just something that lets the user the absolute basics. Two bullet points would be fine, explaining where they must click in the UI to add a password to their wallet, and where they must click in the UI to find and write down their seed words. Then let the user know that this doc is a placeholder, and add a link to a new GitHub issue that is about completing this doc. You can create that GitHub issue right now, and when you commit the placeholder doc, you can reference the GitHub issue ID in the commit comment. This way everything will be linked up, and then when this PR is merged, you can move right on to fleshing out the security doc in a separate PR.

- [ ] With regard to @HarryMacfinned's suggestions in https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq-docs/pull/45#issuecomment-390389929, I would leave most of these as-is, but I agree that something should be done with the sentence that begins with "_Optional:_" It's one of the awkward-flowing bits I mentioned above. One reason for this is that you'd never literally say this to someone. You'd say "Optionally, ..." or some such. This sentence also really wants to be an admonition callout, but we already have a big one right below it, so it's not ideal. I'll leave it to you to smooth this out, but wanted to call out that I agree it could use a bit of work still. Finally on this point, I'm not sure the Tor project documentation is all that useful. On first glance, especially for the uninitiated, I don't think it would be obvious how to adapt those instructions to Bisq. We might even want to yank this instruction entirely, and in the future link to our own custom doc that explains exactly how to verify Bisq signatures. Your call.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq-docs/pull/45#issuecomment-391087907
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20180522/c11a9b14/attachment-0002.html>