Replace occurrences of "private key" with "mnemonic seed phrase" in seed_qr README.md #532
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…eed_qr/REQADME.md.
|
I believe "private key" in this context was used loosely to represent a secret that is stored and entered into a Bitcoin signing device. This said I'm good with this change. I do think it's technically more accurate. @kdmukai this was mostly your original work and better at writing/expressing documentation than I am. Your thoughts? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Replace occurrences of "private key" with "mnemonic seed phrase" in seed_qr README.md.
Description
The seed_qr README.md occasionally uses the term "private key" when "mnemonic seed phrase" is the correct term.
This pull request is categorized as a:
Checklist
pytestand made sure all unit tests pass before sumbitting the PRIf you modified or added functionality/workflow, did you add new unit tests?
I have tested this PR on the following platforms/os:
Note: Keep your changes limited in scope; if you uncover other issues or improvements along the way, ideally submit those as a separate PR. The more complicated the PR the harder to review, test, and merge.