deps: upgrade to sdk v0.50.x

[faddat]

What is the purpose of the change

• Upgrade Osmosis to v0.50.x
• Identify which of Osmosis' dependencies will need upgrades when Osmosis upgrades to v0.50.x

Testing and Verifying

For now, there's not a good reason to test this PR signficantly. It is unlikely to work until an upgraded
packet-forward-middleware and other dependencies have bene completed.

Documentation and Release Note

• Does this pull request introduce a new feature or user-facing behavior changes?
• Changelog entry added to Unreleased section of CHANGELOG.md?

Where is the change documented?

• Specification (x/{module}/README.md)
• Osmosis documentation site
• Code comments?
• N/A

[github-actions]

Important Notice

This PR includes modifications to the tests/e2e/initialization module.
Please follow the instructions below:

1. Backport these changes to the previous Osmosis version's branch.
2. Run the script inside a Docker container to update genesis and configs for pre-upgrade Osmosis.
3. Merge the backported changes.
4. The image will be built and uploaded to Docker Hub here.
5. Grab the latest image and update it in the PR to the main branch replacing the previousVersionInitTag in the osmosis/tests/e2e/containers/config.go

Please let us know if you need any help.

[mattverse]

is this the version with the bank hooks figured out?

[mattverse]

Thanks for the PR @faddat, we are still currently figuring out ways to most efficiently unfork sdk whilst having our changes upstreamed: we're also down to have the next major upgrade soley focused on unforking sdk, upgrading to 50 (if possible). But as mentioned, we still have not figured out if we want to upgrade to v0.50, or even if its possible to do so, so my recommendation would be punting further work for this until we have a fixed decision made! wdyt?

[faddat]

Hey Matt, actually my thought on this is that it might be best to do an investigation into it and then provide you guys with the results but also if you would like us to wait that's totally fine. I'll bring some thoughts to you guys in slack, I think. So I think that a unique challenge that we are going to face is that we're going to have a pretty hard time defining the appropriate steps for the upgrade without some effort into actually doing the upgrade, but I will get you some information in slack and wait to hear back from you before investing a ton more time.

…

On Mon, Aug 7, 2023, 2:58 PM Matt, Park ***@***.***> wrote: Thanks for the PR @faddat <https://github.com/faddat>, we are still currently figuring out ways to most efficiently unfork sdk whilst having our changes upstreamed: we're also down to have the next major upgrade soley focused on unforking sdk, upgrading to 50 (if possible). But as mentioned, we still have not figured out if we want to upgrade to v0.50, or even if its possible to do so, so my recommendation would be punting further work for this until we have a fixed decision made! wdyt? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5952 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABWPVCPDARJ2URNAKUFYR23XUCGYXANCNFSM6AAAAAA3CKQOFU> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[mattverse]

Sounds great, thanks!

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had any recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you!