chore(deps): replace old qgb contracts repo with blobstream repo (backport #2709)

[mergify]

This is an automatic backport of pull request #2709 done by Mergify.
Cherry-pick of c517bd2 has failed:

On branch mergify/bp/v1.x/pr-2709
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/v1.x'.

You are currently cherry-picking commit c517bd2.
  (fix conflicts and run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

Changes to be committed:
	modified:   go.sum
	modified:   x/qgb/types/abi_consts.go
	modified:   x/qgb/types/valset.go

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)
	both modified:   go.mod
	both modified:   x/qgb/client/verify.go

To fix up this pull request, you can check it out locally. See documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/github/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/checking-out-pull-requests-locally

---

Mergify commands and options

More conditions and actions can be found in the documentation.

You can also trigger Mergify actions by commenting on this pull request:

• @Mergifyio refresh will re-evaluate the rules
• @Mergifyio rebase will rebase this PR on its base branch
• @Mergifyio update will merge the base branch into this PR
• @Mergifyio backport <destination> will backport this PR on <destination> branch

Additionally, on Mergify dashboard you can:

• look at your merge queues
• generate the Mergify configuration with the config editor.

Finally, you can contact us on https://mergify.com

[evan-forbes]

I'm not sure that we sure backport this yet 🤔

the reason being that ideally we never backport any breaking changes, therefore we wouldn't backport the name changes to the vars. If we don't back port those then I'm not sure that we should update the constracts either.

[rach-id]

@evan-forbes This is changing only the dependency to depend on blobstream contracts, nothing more. no variable change is done. Also, this isn't breaking as nothing is being persisted or sent over the wire... should we explicitly test that this is not breaking? via running a node

[evan-forbes]

This is changing only the dependency to depend on blobstream contracts, nothing more. no variable change is done.

yeah that makes sense, but why update the contracts if we're not going to update the names on v1.x is what I'm saying

[rach-id]

actually no big reason, just not to have different versions in the app release and in the orchestrators-realyer, and end up with an indirect dependency. Aside from that, doesn't really matter.

I'm fine if we don't need to merge this

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #2720 (5aa0801) into v1.x (c79fb45) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             v1.x    #2720   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   20.41%   20.41%           
=======================================
  Files         139      139           
  Lines       15927    15927           
=======================================
  Hits         3252     3252           
  Misses      12367    12367           
  Partials      308      308           

Files	Coverage Δ
x/qgb/client/verify.go	0.00% <ø> (ø)
x/qgb/types/abi_consts.go	69.23% <ø> (ø)
x/qgb/types/valset.go	0.00% <ø> (ø)

[rootulp]

I'm fine if we don't need to merge this

Please re-open if we want / need this