Rename `max_supply` to `token_supply` for faucet accounts in preparation for upcoming token standards

[onurinanc]

Within token standards, max_supply and token_supply represent different concepts:

• token_supply: the current issued supply of the token.
• max_supply: the maximum cap the supply can ever reach.

At the moment, we are using max_supply to represent the token’s current supply, which is semantically incorrect relative to the standards we want to align with.

As a first step towards the token standards, rename max_supply → token_supply across the codebase and public interfaces.

Not for the next step but for the future work:
We will introduce a new max_supply field that correctly expresses the upper cap of supply. This cap will be enforced through minting flows, representing the maximum supply that can be reached via mint operations.

[bobbinth]

At the moment, we are using max_supply to represent the token’s current supply, which is semantically incorrect relative to the standards we want to align with.

I'm not sure this is accurate: max_supply should represent the maximum supply of a token (i.e., we can't issue more tokens that this), and we do have something like token_supply (called total_issuance) as well.

I think the main issue right now is that total_issuance is protocol-controlled, while max_supply is user controlled. We do have a plan to make total_issuance user-controlled as well (and this may be a good opportunity to rename it to token_supply). This is a part of the "programmable asset" refactoring which will start this week.

[PhilippGackstatter]

#2318 introduced token_supply in BasicFungibleFaucet and NetworkFungibleFaucet which should close this issue. If not, feel free to re-open.