op-proposer: service lifecycle cleanup

[joohhnnn]

In reference to pull/7682, I've addressed portions of issue 7671 / 7684, within the proposer code. I've strived to maintain a coding style consistent with pull/7682, though I'm not certain if anything has been overlooked.

[protolambda]

Thank you, this refactor looks great. I'm catching up with some more PR review after having been OOO for a while, but will take a look at this soon!

[trianglesphere]

Structure looks good, but this needs several golint fixes. run make lint-go from the top level of the repo to verify that they are fixed. Best practice is also to split up moving code from modifying code - it's not easy to quickly check that the function for l2_output_submitter.go got correctly moved over to driver.go

Adding the Admin RPC is also very nice, but again, a little harder to review when including it with the other refactor.

op-e2e/faultproof_test.go:535:55: Error return value of `(github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism/op-proposer/proposer/rpc.ProposerDriver).StopL2OutputSubmitting` is not checked (errcheck)
        sys.L2OutputSubmitter.Driver().StopL2OutputSubmitting()
                                                             ^
op-e2e/system_fpp_test.go:262:55: Error return value of `(github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism/op-proposer/proposer/rpc.ProposerDriver).StopL2OutputSubmitting` is not checked (errcheck)
        sys.L2OutputSubmitter.Driver().StopL2OutputSubmitting()
                                                             ^
op-proposer/metrics/noop.go:30: File is not `goimports`-ed (goimports)
}
op-proposer/proposer/config.go:9: File is not `goimports`-ed (goimports)

op-proposer/proposer/driver.go:12: File is not `goimports`-ed (goimports)

[joohhnnn]

Best practice is also to split up moving code from modifying code

Thank you @trianglesphere for the advice. Next time, I will open two separate pull requests to make the review process smoother :)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #8040 (519ea7a) into develop (111f3f3) will decrease coverage by 1.07%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #8040      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    53.78%   52.71%   -1.07%     
===========================================
  Files          162      162              
  Lines         6171     6171              
  Branches       966      966              
===========================================
- Hits          3319     3253      -66     
- Misses        2728     2763      +35     
- Partials       124      155      +31     

Flag	Coverage Δ
cannon-go-tests	63.47% <ø> (ø)
chain-mon-tests	26.95% <ø> (ø)
common-ts-tests	26.74% <ø> (ø)
contracts-bedrock-tests	58.38% <ø> (-3.37%)	⬇️
contracts-ts-tests	100.00% <ø> (ø)
core-utils-tests	44.03% <ø> (ø)
sdk-next-tests	41.92% <ø> (ø)
sdk-tests	41.92% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

see 5 files with indirect coverage changes

[trianglesphere]

@joohhnnn there's a couple more lints & one merge conflict to fix.

[ajsutton]

@trianglesphere Are you ok to do a final review on this or do you want me to dive in and review (I'd have to come up to speed on the general context of the proposer)?