feat(cardano): allow external reward addresses in governance registrations

[davidmisiak]

Changes in governance registrations:

• Reward address can be provided as an address string instead of address parameters.
• If the reward address is provided as address parameters, we display its credentials instead of address string.
• If a non-payment reward address is provided, we display a warning that the address is not eligible for voting rewards (context).

[davidmisiak]

Hi @matejcik, any updates on this please?

Also, there was a recent change in CIP-36:

• The gov_vk bech32 prefix was replaced by cvote_vk.
• Usage of governance in naming is discouraged (they reserve the term for other purposes to avoid confusion) and they recommend using CIP-36 vote instead.

Therefore I suggest changing gov_vk to cvote_vk and replacing all occurences of governance in the codebase with cvote - what do you think? If you agree, shall I add the change to this PR?

[matejcik]

Therefore I suggest changing gov_vk to cvote_vk and replacing all occurences of governance in the codebase with cvote - what do you think? If you agree, shall I add the change to this PR?

I have no opinion on the change. "cvote" is shorter than "governance" so that's nice, the prefixes are completely up to Cardano and/or you.
Feel free to add it to this PR if you can.

[davidmisiak]

Done - I changed the bech32 prefix, replaced governance by cvote and renamed reward_address to payment_address in CIP36 registrations (as they did in CIP36). I also rebased onto the current master.

[davidmisiak]

I added one more minor rename (voting public key -> vote public key), 2752b4c.

Shall I also update UI tests or should I wait?

[matejcik]

please go ahead with the UI tests

[davidmisiak]

Rebased, updated UI tests and added changelog entries.

[bosomt]

Is there anything that can/needs to be done by QA team ?

[matejcik]

don't think so