Improve INSTALL_GC_STACK documentation flow

[rudokemper]

Right now, the INSTALL_GC_STACK.md section structure is as follows...

## Different ways to install apps

### Option 1. Installing the entire stack with **`stack-deploy-tool`**

### Option 2. Install One-Click Apps through the CapRover UI

### CoMapeo Archive Server

### Filebrowser

#### After Install

...

I might be inclined to think that I don't need to read the app-specific notes if I've gone with Option 1. In fact, scanning some of the copy reinforces that impression e.g. "If you plan to install Superset, install the Redis application from the one-click app install menu."

However, some of the "After Install" notes are first-time config things that must be done manually, regardless of the install route.

So I wonder if we can do...

## Different ways to install apps

### Option 1. Installing the entire stack with **`stack-deploy-tool`**

### Option 2. Install One-Click Apps through the CapRover UI

any app-specific notes here that relate only to installing one-click apps e.g. you need redis if you want superset

## Post-install app configuration

first-time windmill and superset config, etc.

Originally posted by @rudokemper in #44 (comment)

@IamJeffG said he had some additional questions that came up re-reading the docs; please feel free to add.

[rudokemper]

It seems to me this was already addressed in #44. At least the things I was thinking of.

[IamJeffG]

I thought you were suggesting that the "post-install" content gets split up by the criterion of: does stack_deploy handle this for you or not?

• When it does, then that content ought to go directly under "Option 2. Install One-Click Apps through the CapRover UI".
• And when it does not then it applies to both Options, and needs to live in its own section.

By the way, I think there also seems to be a subclass of info under "post-install": the things that are actually documented in the one-click-app post-install instructions. That stuff does need to be manually done in Option 2, but since it's already documented elsewhere do we want to keep it in this README too?

[rudokemper]

Ah, you're right, that aspect didn't get done yet. Re-opening for now.