e2e: Run separate e2e jobs for mainnet and fuji rulesets

[marun]

The existing e2e job tests against network configured with a local ruleset. To ensure coverage that is more representative, this PR adds new jobs for running the e2e suite against each of the mainnet and fuji rulesets.

TODO

• Figure out whether to update the tests for pre-Durango compatibility. The e2e tests were recently updated to be Durango-only which mainly means that validator and delegator addition no longer provides the Start parameter required by pre-Durango rulesets.
• Update required jobs post-merge

[abi87]

we should probably add naming for these new networks and mapping networkIDs <-> networkName, simiarl to other networks.

[marun]

Why is being able to map the ids to names desirable if we're only ever intending to use the new ids for configuring rulesets for e2e testing?

[abi87]

I agree we should keep the e2e tests green even in case of deferred fork activation across networks (testnet, fuji, mainnet).
I would only fix the mapping of networkID <--> networkName.
Also we'll need to explicitly handle at least Durango fork in every e2e test. Should this be done in this PR?

[marun]

I agree we should keep the e2e tests green even in case of deferred fork activation across networks (testnet, fuji, mainnet). I would only fix the mapping of networkID <--> networkName. Also we'll need to explicitly handle at least Durango fork in every e2e test. Should this be done in this PR?

Since e2e tests are already Durango compatible, maybe this PR can wait until Durango is activated on both Fuji and Mainnet to enable the new jobs? At that point any e2e changes required to support E will have to be backwards compatible to ensure the new jobs will continue to pass.

[github-actions]

This PR has become stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. Adding the lifecycle/frozen label will cause this PR to ignore lifecycle events.

[marun]

@StephenButtolph will be proposing a different approach so this PR is no longer needed.