chore: relocate tm2/std.MemFile in gnovm/std

[moul]

This PR removes "gno.land" from all tm2/.../*.go files.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 85.71429% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 60.95%. Comparing base (d3049ae) to head (40eaad0).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
gno.land/pkg/keyscli/run.go	66.66%	1 Missing ⚠️
gno.land/pkg/sdk/vm/keeper.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2910      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   60.97%   60.95%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         564      565       +1     
  Lines       75273    75288      +15     
==========================================
- Hits        45901    45889      -12     
- Misses      26005    26029      +24     
- Partials     3367     3370       +3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
contribs/gnodev	61.46% <ø> (ø)
contribs/gnofaucet	15.31% <ø> (ø)
gno.land	67.92% <77.77%> (ø)
gnovm	65.79% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
misc/genstd	80.54% <ø> (ø)
misc/logos	20.23% <ø> (ø)
tm2	62.05% <100.00%> (+0.02%)	⬆️

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.

[moul]

I chose to create gnovm/pkg/std, but we should consider merging it with gnovm/pkg/stdlibs/std. What do you think?

I removed the .pb.go files that were added forcefully. Should I revert this change?

[thehowl]

I have a more general question - why do we name anything std? Is there any standard involved?

[moul]

I have a more general question - why do we name anything std? Is there any standard involved?

Right now, we refer to these as "lowest level types." The closest name we have is "sys," and the system contracts are currently named "r/sys." We also considered naming them "r/std." Essentially, this serves as our standard for low-level system components.

In this repository, we have three standard packages designed to be imported to connect with the components without loading other parts (lightweight, no side effects).

An alternative for the Go side would be to rename them to "types." However, it's important to distinguish between "system/low-level types" and "all types." One invites connection with a minimal API (communication layer), while the other is more internal and advanced.

I'm open to reconsidering a renaming, although I believe we will likely prefer to stick with the current approach. My question is about balancing independence with unifying gnovm's standard messages.

[moul]

By the way, the relocation is complete, and the CI is green. I have two other PRs in mind that will depend on merging this one. Please feel free to review it, and we can discuss the "naming" topic later, maybe.