Merge 1.0.0-maint into main

[joel-u410]

This branch merges and resolves conflicts for 1.0.0-maint into main.

@Fraccaman @mateuszjasiuk -- I went ahead and opened this because I am running my fork based on main but wanted my recent 1.0.0-maint PRs incorporated too 🙂

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/1.0.0-maint' into joel/1.0.0-maint-merge-main

# Conflicts:
#	chain/src/main.rs
#	orm/src/schema.rs
#	orm/src/transactions.rs
#	shared/src/transaction.rs
#	webserver/src/app.rs
#	webserver/src/error/api.rs
#	webserver/src/error/mod.rs
#	webserver/src/handler/mod.rs
#	webserver/src/repository/mod.rs
#	webserver/src/response/mod.rs
#	webserver/src/service/mod.rs
#	webserver/src/state/common.rs

[joel-u410]

@Fraccaman -- I just updated this with the latest 1.0.0-maint and the latest main. There were a few more conflicts, most of which were straightforward to resolve, but there was one thing I wasn't sure about:

• In 7e39bbb on the 1.0.0-maint side, you added pub last_processed_block_height: i32 to the API response for crawler_state.
• In a8fde04 on the main side, you added pub last_processed_block: Option<i32> to the same API response.

I wasn't sure which one should "win" this conflict, so I combined them:

• pub last_processed_block_height: Option<i32>

Also:

• On the 1.0.0-maint side, the namada SDK was updated to the v1.0.0 release.
• On the main side, the namada SDK was updated to the fraccaman/rpc-pgf-payments branch.

Since fraccaman/rpc-pgf-payments has been merged, but is not part of v1.0.0, I resolved it by updating namada to the main branch.

Can we merge this soon before these branches drift more & create more conflicts? 🙂

[Fraccaman]

thanks a lot!