Skip to content

doc: refresh Bitgesell README overview#331

Open
hermesbountyhunter wants to merge 1 commit into
BitgesellOfficial:masterfrom
hermesbountyhunter:docs/bitgesell-readme-overview
Open

doc: refresh Bitgesell README overview#331
hermesbountyhunter wants to merge 1 commit into
BitgesellOfficial:masterfrom
hermesbountyhunter:docs/bitgesell-readme-overview

Conversation

@hermesbountyhunter

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Summary

  • Replace README content that described the standalone secp256k1 library with a Bitgesell-specific feature overview.
  • Keep the existing build quickstart, but point readers to the repository's platform build docs instead of secp256k1 module flags.
  • Summarize the actual project components: Bitcoin Core-derived node/wallet, LevelDB, secp256k1, Qt, and test suites.

Verification

  • Documentation-only change; no build required.
  • Reviewed the updated README diff locally.

Refs #32

@MyTH-zyxeon

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Maintainers - this looks like a plausible small #81 improvement-program candidate in the "codebase cleaning / README updates" lane, assuming the new overview now matches the actual Bitgesell project rather than the upstream secp256k1 library framing.

What seems reviewer-friendly here:

  • Scope is narrow and non-runtime: one README.md rewrite, no consensus, wallet, RPC, or build-logic changes.
  • The old README sections being removed were largely describing secp256k1 internals/modules rather than the Bitgesell node/wallet project itself, so replacing that with project-specific features looks directionally correct.
  • The issue body for #81 explicitly says README/comment cleanups can be useful, even if they should likely be paid at a lower tier than substantive test/CI/code fixes.

Suggested acceptance checks:

  1. Confirm every retained feature bullet is true for the current repo state (Keccak hashing, SegWit-only policy, fee-burn summary, block-weight target, halving cadence, max supply).
  2. Confirm the README still points contributors to the right build entrypoints under doc/ for supported platforms.
  3. Confirm the trimmed "Built With" list does not accidentally imply that embedded secp256k1 internals are the primary product rather than a dependency/component.

If you consider this too documentation-only for the main #81 lane, a quick maintainer note on the expected payout tier or acceptance bar for README cleanups would help contributors avoid guessing on future small PRs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants