chore: move gnoland genesis to contribs/gnogenesis

[zivkovicmilos]

Description

This PR migrates the gnoland genesis command suite under contribs/gnogenesis, after following discussions from #2824, and internal discussions.

BREAKING CHANGE
gnoland genesis will cease to exist after this PR, instead, you will need to use the binary in contribs/gnogenesis.
It's installed by default after running make install from the repo root.

Closes #2824

Contributors' checklist...

• Added new tests, or not needed, or not feasible
• Provided an example (e.g. screenshot) to aid review or the PR is self-explanatory
• Updated the official documentation or not needed
• No breaking changes were made, or a BREAKING CHANGE: xxx message was included in the description
• Added references to related issues and PRs
• Provided any useful hints for running manual tests

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 63.08%. Comparing base (d03581e) to head (e667e9c).
Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3041      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   63.37%   63.08%   -0.29%     
==========================================
  Files         566      548      -18     
  Lines       79490    78514     -976     
==========================================
- Hits        50374    49532     -842     
+ Misses      25727    25634      -93     
+ Partials     3389     3348      -41     

Flag	Coverage Δ
contribs/gnodev	60.57% <ø> (ø)
contribs/gnofaucet	14.82% <ø> (ø)
gno.land	63.82% <ø> (-3.56%)	⬇️
gnovm	67.87% <ø> (ø)
misc/genstd	79.72% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[zivkovicmilos]

Heads up @mazzy89 @r3v4s @sw360cab @albttx @D4ryl00

[moul]

Thank you, Milos.

[leohhhn]

I don't think this command should be installed by default with make install. It doesn't fit in the standard Gnome dev flow; like gno, gnodev, gnokey do.

We should keep the happy dev flow clean and minimal imho.

[zivkovicmilos]

@leohhhn

I don't think this command should be installed by default with make install. It doesn't fit in the standard Gnome dev flow like gno, gnodev, gnokey do.

We should keep the happy dev flow clean and minimal imho.

You are more than welcome to open a PR that removes it from the "standard happy flow", and also improve tutorials on how this new binary can be used in development environments, if this is something in plan for the "gno developer roadmap".
I haven't seen much research done to support these ideas, given we have a very limited developer base to begin with, and most of them are advanced users of the gnoland binary.

I've kept it easy to install to avoid shell headaches. We can remove it definitely in the future.
The PR doesn't even introduce a Docker image, which is something we also need (cc @sw360cab)