fix --dump-tx for reveal-pk; dump serialized reveal-pk transaction wh…

[dan-u410]

fix --dump-tx for reveal-pk; dump serialized reveal-pk transaction when it is needed for an account

Describe your changes

The reveal-pk transaction type silently returns when the --dump-tx flag is provided. Offline signing flows might want that transaction serialized to be signed by offline keys. This PR adds logic to the submit_reveal_aux function to serialize the transaction when needed.

Examples:

./target/release/namada client transparent-transfer  \
 --node https://rpc.namada.tududes.com  \
 --source <addr1>  \
 --target <addr2>  \
 --amount 1  \
 --token tnam1q87wtaqqtlwkw927gaff34hgda36huk0kgry692a  \
 --dump-tx
A tx to reveal the public key for address <addr> is needed...
Below the serialized transaction: 

<serialized tx>
Below the serialized transaction: 

<serialized tx>

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

This is based on the current main branch. (Should I rebase to draft?)

Checklist before merging to draft

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 12 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 53.47%. Comparing base (22a4839) to head (9e32c43).
Report is 1256 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
crates/apps_lib/src/client/tx.rs	0.00%	12 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3538      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   53.47%   53.47%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         320      320              
  Lines      110000   110008       +8     
==========================================
- Hits        58826    58824       -2     
- Misses      51174    51184      +10     

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

[grarco]

@dan-u410 do you think this PR is still relevant?