More ReadMe Consistency Issues about se-2-challenges

[ZakGriffith]

Most of the above are implemented now, but wanted opinions on the remaining topics:

Challenge 5 has a "We Will:" section under the explanation that the other challenges do not have. Not sure we need to take any action here as it does work well for that challenge to sum that up beforehand.

This line is inconsistent between challenges, which is better? (It's also not in challenge 0 at all, should it be?)

• 👩‍💻 Rerun yarn deploy --reset whenever you want to deploy new contracts to the frontend, update your current contracts with changes, or re-deploy it to get a fresh contract address.
• 👩‍💻 Rerun yarn deploy whenever you want to deploy new contracts to the frontend (run yarn deploy --reset for a completely fresh deploy if you have made no contract changes).

[ ] Add a note in the blocknumber section about how to obtain that block number.

[Pabl0cks]

Challenge 5 has a "We Will:" section under the explanation that the other challenges do not have. Not sure we need to take any action here as it does work well for that challenge to sum that up beforehand.

I like the We Will: section in that case since its a great summary of what you will have to accomplish in the challenge. Challenge 5 use cases are a bit more special than previous challenges, so I feel is great to have it summarized in that way.

If we want to give it more visibility we could change "We will:" for something like "## Main Quests 🏅" or something like that.

For the Challenges 0-4 we got this section in the Readme where we basically say all the stuff they'll have to accomplish, but in a less ordered way:

🌟 The final deliverable is an app that allows ...

I feel is enough for those, but if we see it would be an improvement to show it in a list, we could migrate the Challenge 5 format to the rest of the challenges.

---

This line is inconsistent between challenges, which is better? (It's also not in challenge 0 at all, should it be?)

Even I think I wrote first variation myself, it seems like we suggesting our users to use always yarn deploy --reset, so maybe we should use 2nd variation better:

👩‍💻 Rerun yarn deploy whenever you want to deploy new contracts to the frontend (run yarn deploy --reset for a completely fresh deploy if you have made no contract changes).

We could re-write it a bit if we see this other variation more clear:

👩‍💻 Rerun yarn deploy whenever you want to deploy new contracts to the frontend. If you haven't made any contract changes, you can run yarn deploy --reset for a completely fresh deploy.

In the Challenge 0, since users probably won't do any change to the contract, maybe that point is not that necesary. They're being introduced to SE-2 and all the stuff is new for them, so maybe is OK to know about yarn deploy --reset from the Challenge 1 to not overwhelm them.

---

[ ] Add a note in the blocknumber section about how to obtain that block number.

I think it's a great idea to add a note/screenshot about how to obtain the specific blocknumber where their contracts were deployed.

[ZakGriffith]

If we want to give it more visibility we could change "We will:" for something like "## Main Quests 🏅" or something like that.

Love it, done.

👩‍💻 Rerun yarn deploy whenever you want to deploy new contracts to the frontend. If you haven't made any contract changes, you can run yarn deploy --reset for a completely fresh deploy.

Normalized them all (Except 0) to this phrasing.

I think it's a great idea to add a note/screenshot about how to obtain the specific blocknumber where their contracts were deployed.

Done.