Add a param to enable/disable nam transfers

[yito88]

Describe your changes

closes #2842

Indicate on which release or other PRs this topic is based on

v0.31.9

Checklist before merging to draft

• I have added a changelog
• Git history is in acceptable state

[grarco]

There's an issue with make check-crates but apart from that looks good to me, thank you!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 97.89916% with 5 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 53.96%. Comparing base (cc3edde) to head (670fbce).
Report is 117 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
crates/namada/src/ledger/native_vp/multitoken.rs	97.22%	5 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2846      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   53.88%   53.96%   +0.07%     
==========================================
  Files         308      308              
  Lines      100154   100331     +177     
==========================================
+ Hits        53967    54140     +173     
- Misses      46187    46191       +4     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[cwgoes]

lgtm

[Fraccaman]

will this prevent bonding? I think we need to be able to transfer nam to the PoS account if we need to bond.

[cwgoes]

will this prevent bonding? I think we need to be able to transfer nam to the PoS account if we need to bond.

Ah, good point - in that case we should allow transfers to (but not from) the PoS account.

[brentstone]

will this prevent bonding? I think we need to be able to transfer nam to the PoS account if we need to bond.

Ah, good point - in that case we should allow transfers to (but not from) the PoS account.

More particularly, perhaps we should allow transfers between Internal addresses and Implicit / Established addresses, since we need the same functionality with Governance and then the MASP before transfers are enabled (and maybe others I'm not considering)

[cwgoes]

will this prevent bonding? I think we need to be able to transfer nam to the PoS account if we need to bond.

Ah, good point - in that case we should allow transfers to (but not from) the PoS account.

More particularly, perhaps we should allow transfers between Internal addresses and Implicit / Established addresses, since we need the same functionality with Governance and then the MASP before transfers are enabled (and maybe others I'm not considering)

I don't quite follow - why would we need to transfer NAM (specifically) to and from the MASP or governance, before NAM transfers are enabled?

[brentstone]

Gov proposals require that the author send NAM to the gov address, which is kept if the proposal fails I believe (and refunded if passed). And if you want to shield NAM, don't we send it to the MASP address?

[cwgoes]

Gov proposals require that the author send NAM to the gov address, which is kept if the proposal fails I believe (and refunded if passed). And if you want to shield NAM, don't we send it to the MASP address?

Governance proposal deposits are OK. We do not want to allow shielding NAM until transfers are enabled.