Consistent dependencies on transaction types - Closes #2779

[2snEM6]

What was the problem?

Transactions logic didn't have a consistent common interface. Some of the logic presented completely different constructor definitions even passing the same dependencies.

How did I fix it?

Unifying (to some extent) how Transactions logic is instantiated and simplified their constructor definition.

How to test it?

Run unit tests

Review checklist

• The PR resolves Refactor the logic files of all transaction types to have consistent dependencies #2779
• All new code is covered with unit tests
• All new code was formatted with Prettier
• Linting passes
• Tests pass
• Commit messages follow the commit guidelines
• Documentation has been added/updated

[2snEM6]

@nazarhussain ready for review whenever you can

[diego-G]

Clean out unit test from done() when possible and use async instead of return.

[nazarhussain]

@limiaspasdaniel Just one last request, if we use __scope compared to __private that will link up the concept of scope on higher level. The __ in start already specifying convention that its private.

[diego-G]

I would continue a bit further extending the issue to cover the root of all transaction types. https://github.com/LiskHQ/lisk/blob/5c242660e88aaef3e536770d883de22c71f4d2d3/framework/src/modules/chain/logic/transaction.js#L50
What do you think @limiaspasdaniel ? Open a new issue if you consider it appropriate.

[2snEM6]

I totally agree @diego-G , it will definitely look cleaner and it makes sense. I will open another issue so this PR doesn't get too big.