[tracking] address feedback from Polkadot forum

[jmg-duarte]

Forum comment: https://forum.polkadot.network/t/polkadot-native-storage-updates/7021/44

🚒 Urgent

• Errors exposed to the user are not informative (WIP already, but not done yet) - refactor: Publish storage deals #599
• The docs are still being improved and, in the current iteration, may be confusing (in short, installation/setup workflow is confusing — needs more info
• The docs are out of sync with the repo, which made me waste 1-2 hours until I discovered that). This will be improved as well. Binaries/containers are out of sync with the docs as well (e.g. the faucet command) — docs are ahead, we need to rebuild the binaries
• The repo defaults to develop but the docs refer to releases and some PRs with fixes don’t have useful recent commits, while latest release (and therefore, containers) has a 3 week old release) — write a banner in the README stating that main has the "stable" build
• Publish deal RPC error is confusing — fix(storage-provider-server): better error message for missing deal proposal #607

⚠️ Important

• More info about max size of blobs that can be PUT
• GET steps (there are none, but we need to document that)
• I wonder if there will be a way to differentiate public vs. private access
• Recommended approach to encrypt objects, in the case public access be the default (I can’t tell if it will or won’t, since GET step isn’t in the docs right now)
• It’s not very clear - although it didn’t impact my evaluation - if it’s OK to submit and sign a proposal before start_block as long as it’s not published before it. I wouldn’t expect that PUT can be performed before start_block, but maybe other steps can although, even in that case, the question is how much before start_block (i.e. N-14400, N-256, etc.)