This change set implements the most recent version of `FinalizeBlock`. 

# What does this change actually contain?

* This change set is rather large but fear not! The majority of the files touched and changes are renaming `ResponseDeliverTx` to `ExecTxResult`. This should be a pretty inoffensive change since they're effectively the same type but with a different name.
* The `execBlockOnProxyApp` was totally removed since it served as just a wrapper around the logic that is now mostly encapsulated within `FinalizeBlock`
* The `updateState` helper function has been made a public method on `State`. It was being exposed as a shim through the testing infrastructure, so this seemed innocuous.
* Tests already existed to ensure that the application received the `ByzantineValidators` and the `ValidatorUpdates`, but one was fixed up to ensure that `LastCommitInfo` was being sent across.
* Tests were removed from the `psql` indexer that seemed to search for an event in the indexer that was not being created.

# Questions for reviewers
* We store this [ABCIResponses](5721a13ab1/proto/tendermint/state/types.pb.go (L37)) type in the data base as the block results. This type has changed since v0.35 to contain the `FinalizeBlock` response. I'm wondering if we need to do any shimming to keep the old data retrieveable?
* Similarly, this change is exposed via the RPC through [ResultBlockResults](5721a13ab1/rpc/coretypes/responses.go (L69)) changing. Should we somehow shim or notify for this change? 


closes: #7658

* Rebased and git-squashed the commits in PR #6546

migrate abci to finalizeBlock

work on abci, proxy and mempool

abciresponse, blok events, indexer, some tests

fix some tests

fix errors

fix errors in abci

fix tests amd errors

* Fixes after rebasing PR#6546

* Restored height to RequestFinalizeBlock & other

* Fixed more UTs

* Fixed kvstore

* More UT fixes

* last TC fixed

* make format

* Update internal/consensus/mempool_test.go

Co-authored-by: William Banfield <4561443+williambanfield@users.noreply.github.com>

* Addressed @williambanfield's comments

* Fixed UTs

* Addressed last comments from @williambanfield

* make format

Co-authored-by: marbar3778 <marbar3778@yahoo.com>
Co-authored-by: William Banfield <4561443+williambanfield@users.noreply.github.com>

To simplify local testing, do not report failures for tests that require Docker
when Docker is not avaliable. Instead, log a warning and skip the tests.
This has no effect in CI, where Docker is installed.

No API changes, merely changes the import path.

* build(deps): Bump github.com/adlio/schema from 1.1.15 to 1.2.2

Bumps [github.com/adlio/schema](https://github.com/adlio/schema) from 1.1.15 to 1.2.2.
- [Release notes](https://github.com/adlio/schema/releases)
- [Commits](https://github.com/adlio/schema/compare/v1.1.15...v1.2.2)

---
updated-dependencies:
- dependency-name: github.com/adlio/schema
  dependency-type: direct:production
  update-type: version-update:semver-minor
...

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>

* Work around API changes in the migrator package.

A recent update inadvertently broke the API by changing the receiver types of
the methods without updating the constructor.

See: https://github.com/adlio/schema/issues/13

Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: M. J. Fromberger <fromberger@interchain.io>

Some of our tests were creating a psql event sink and expecting
it to report (or not report) certain kinds of errors. These tests
were ill-founded in a couple of ways:

1. Tests that required the Postgres driver were not loading it.
   This led to spurious successes on tests that wanted "some error"
   from the sink constructor, but didn't exercise the right path.

2. Tests that wanted a Postgres sink to succeed without a database.
   These tests "passed" because they weren't actually establishing a
   connection to the database, but if they had would have failed for
   the lack of one.

To fix this:
- Load the postgres driver in tests that need it.
- Verify connectivity before reporting successful creation of a PSQL event sink.
- Remove tests that wanted a psql sink without a database, since that case
  is already tested elsewhere.

Co-authored-by: Callum Waters <cmwaters19@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: M. J. Fromberger <fromberger@interchain.io>