Refact rpc client to use jsonrpcs Client directly, server support for named and null parameters.

[jaoleal]

Description and Notes

• ee24899: While messing around the codebase i noticed that we actually were tying our rpcs to Json which actually makes our codebase messy mixing rpc execution and response/request building, which IMHO should be done in separate api levels. Theres still Json types being re-implemented in the server but i wanted to keep the scope, maybe a follow-up Pr to solve that ? Also, jsonrpc client implementation is pretty robust, besides it should make easier to also make floresta-cli core-compatible for us to better test our schema compatibility and achieve what i mentioned here
  f6a3311: With this proposal in mind I moved our floresta-specific RPC code to a proper module expecting it to receive more RPC handling over types. "floresta-rpc should hold only client implementation", well if we really need to stick with that and consequently still have problems with type re-implementation and drifting maybe we should consider nuking it totally and moving these to floresta common since we would need only some work-arounds to corepc-client to satisfy the support for floresta, which is not an horrible idea IMHO... But is MUCH more conformable to not to.

Dropped the related commit, Im thinking that may be better to use another lib to handle server and client for us...

How to verify the changes you have done?

cargo build
cargo test -p floresta-rpc

The tests are all returning 422 Http error Lol, Ill debug that because we may be doing something wrong Client or Server side... because of that, draft for now.

Found the bug and it was indeed our side... Ill add the third commit fixing the bug since it introduces a lot of changes server side.

Contributor Checklist

• I've followed the contribution guidelines
• I've verified one of the following:
  • Ran just pcc (recommended but slower)
  • Ran just lint-features '-- -D warnings' && cargo test --release
  • Confirmed CI passed on my fork
• I've linked any related issue(s) in the sections above

Finally, you are encouraged to sign all your commits (it proves authorship and guards against tampering—see How (and why) to sign Git commits and GitHub's guide to signing commits).

[jaoleal]

cc @moisesPompilio

[moisesPompilio]

Concept ACK

The idea of using the RPC client directly is interesting. It appears to be easier to understand and reduces our code maintenance burden.

[jaoleal]

Actually, instead of using rust-bitcoins rpc ive been seeing this other crate which appears to be even more extensive about jsonrpc and rpc in general... Being production ready, used by many people and should be better in order to have a robust clien-server

https://docs.rs/jsonrpsee/latest/jsonrpsee/

[jaoleal]

Im reconsidering this, im thinking to actually copy paste jsonrpc inside floresta-rpc.

Why?

1. Their types are used against core and should help us to prevent compatibility bugs.
2. We are using them anyway but we are blocked to ask for support, changes and we are partially rewriting the code but still using theirs

cc @Davidson-Souza @moisesPompilio