Cleanup resourceID/chainID/executeProposal tests

[kmadk]

No description provided.

[drewstone]

Would recommend copying @nepoche and i's naming convention on branches. If you're confused on process, don't be afraid to ask questions in slack and/or to us directly. Naming conventions should be copy-able by looking at our work/PRs.

As far as renaming goes in these tests, it all seems fine to shift origin to source. However, I think semantically the tests aren't correct. It seems we:

1. Create a linkable anchor on the source chain
2. Vote on update proposals created with source chain ID on source chain anchor

Doesn't this seem wrong? We should be creating update proposals for dest chain ID no? The linkable anchor on source chain should be bridged (addEdge/updateEdge) with the dest chain. Can you verify that these tests include that?

[kmadk]

As far as renaming goes in these tests, it all seems fine to shift origin to source. However, I think semantically the tests aren't correct. It seems we:

1. Create a linkable anchor on the source chain
2. Vote on update proposals created with source chain ID on source chain anchor

Doesn't this seem wrong? We should be creating update proposals for dest chain ID no? The linkable anchor on source chain should be bridged (addEdge/updateEdge) with the dest chain. Can you verify that these tests include that?

All of the proposal tests have the Bridge instance instantiated on destChainID along with a corresponding handler and anchor on destChainID. The vote and execute proposal calls are all voting and acting through the bridge on the destChainID chain after a deposit happens on the source chain so the update proposals are on the correct chain for all these tests. This design carries over from the chainBridge depositProposal tests that I didn't change.

Thank you for the help with the naming convention I have been a bit messy with that I understand. For future reference should a branch like this be called "kelton-clean-up" or what do you think would be a proper name.