Add `Node` move constructor

Nobody has claimed this yet.

From Jason Burmark:

> [Codex] also pointed out that conduit::Node doesn't have a move constructor, which would probably be a good thing to add.

> conduit::Node itself is generally fine on destruction. Its copy constructor does a deep copy via
set(node), so copied nodes own their own storage and clean up independently; see conduit/src/libs/
conduit/conduit_node.cpp:109. Conduit does not appear to define a C++ move constructor for Node; it has
a Node::move(Node&) member function instead, which is a different thing; see conduit/src/libs/conduit/
conduit_node.cpp:8926. So the main risk with Node is accidental extra deep copies and higher memory
use, not a double-free.

Start in conduit/src/libs/conduit/conduit_node.cpp at the copy-constructor implementation around line 109 and the existing Node::move(Node&) member around line 8926. Trace the Node declaration and current construction behavior, then verify that adding move construction avoids unnecessary deep copies while preserving ownership and destruction semantics.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.