Substitute Unconfirmed for Processing BSQ swap

[MwithM]

Unconfirmed BSQ swap seems like something failed, while Processing is used by some wallets for unconfirmed transactions and has no negative implications.

[boring-cyborg]

Thanks for opening this pull request!

Please check out our contributor checklist and check if Travis or Codacy found any issues with your PR. Also make sure your commits are signed, and that you applied Bisq's code style and formatting.

A maintainer will add an is:priority label to your PR if it is up for compensation. Please see our Bisq Q1 2020 Update post for more details.

[ripcurlx]

@chimp1984 WDYT ☝️

[chimp1984]

Hm... I never saw processing being used in a BTC wallet and it comes with me with the wrong meaning that someone (company) is processing it. I think confirmed/unconfirmed is for Bitcoiners a standard term. But no super strong opinion either.

[MwithM]

"Pending" would not have third party implications and it's used at ETH/RSK wallets.
Anyway, it's probably better to leave it as Unconfirmed because this is the specific, technical term and wait if it's really confusing once implemented. Probably we will get used to it.

[ripcurlx]

I think if we keep the naming we might extend the Your BSQ swap trade is completed with:

Until your trade is included in a block you can see your completed trade at "Portfolio/Unconfirmed BSQ swaps"

[chimp1984]

"Pending" would not have third party implications and it's used at ETH/RSK wallets.

For ETH: Yes they depend usually heavily on 3rd parties (e.g. Infura), so "processing" in their context is more adequate IMO.

[bisq-github-admin-3]

utACK - based on #5884 (comment)

[boring-cyborg]

Awesome work, congrats on your first merged pull request!