feat: rework proposal messages

[robert-zaremba]

Description

• remove title and assure to use x/gov metatadata if x/gov authority is used
• assure to set description otherwise.

Considerations

• use memo instead of description
  • pro: no need to keep description
  • cons: people usually don't use memo
  • cons: not possible to enforce memo for non x/gov proposals.

[gsk967]

LGTM
Only one suggestion like , if you want remove title and description then remove it , no need for description again for emergency txn , anyway we can retrive from metadata field

[robert-zaremba]

@gsk967 I think description is needed for Emergency Group, because otherwise there is no way to explain the context. I think that should be on chain.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2203 (6e08423) into main (7f05ad4) will decrease coverage by 5.03%.
Report is 191 commits behind head on main.
The diff coverage is 81.83%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2203      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   75.38%   70.36%   -5.03%     
==========================================
  Files         100      165      +65     
  Lines        8025    12594    +4569     
==========================================
+ Hits         6050     8862    +2812     
- Misses       1589     3141    +1552     
- Partials      386      591     +205     

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
ante/spam_prevention.go	75.92% <ø> (ø)
cmd/ibc_denom/main.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
util/coin/coin.go	12.50% <0.00%> (ø)
x/incentive/codec.go	47.82% <ø> (+9.89%)	⬆️
x/incentive/keeper/invariants.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
x/incentive/keeper/program.go	56.00% <ø> (ø)
x/incentive/keeper/reward.go	82.35% <ø> (ø)
x/incentive/keeper/store.go	70.67% <ø> (ø)
x/incentive/keeper/unbonding.go	80.45% <ø> (ø)
x/incentive/keeper/update.go	52.11% <ø> (ø)
... and 59 more

... and 71 files with indirect coverage changes

[gsk967]

LGTM

@robert-zaremba I need one final confirmation , are you sure all explorers (pingpub/mintscan) showing proposal title and description from metadata feild ?

[robert-zaremba]

@gsk967 pingpub and mintscan yes, other I don't know, they should.
adding Title to the message is not recommended nor documented. In the 0.46 documentation it is said explicitly to use metadata. In 0.47 they readded the fields to the x/gov Proposal.

[toteki]

I have a preference for using memo for emergency groups instead of sometimes using description and sometimes not. It's not a strong preference though

We will have to make sure (during a testnet) that when running this code against existing networks that we don't get problems such as unknown field: title when querying previous MsgGovUpdateRegistry which have that field.

[gsk967]

@toteki title is not deleted, it is reserved, so there will be no issues like unknown field: title on Marshal/Unmarshaling

and description field make sense more than memo field because we already have memo param on txn , so sometimes it will make confuse