fix: Scope tokio dependency to relevant features

[miguelpduarte]

This allows e.g. depending on TaskChampion with default_features = false and being able to operate on the types directly.

This may be useful when e.g. consuming TaskChampion-shaped data from an API.

It also makes it possible to build TaskChampion for WASM targets, as long as the notes for uuid are followed.

(As per my comment in #626 🙂)

[miguelpduarte]

Hmm, not sure what to do about the failing tests since they all depend on tokio, but it will become annoying and bothersome to gate all of that behind cfg 😕

I had this building locally for the use-case mentioned in the other PR, but also now noticed that #617 exists - so it might make sense to "join forces" with the work done there, although there hasn't been activity in the PR for some time.

I opened this mostly to share the changes I had locally to make things work for me. If this doesn't make sense to pursue, I can close it or change it to a draft PR, as per maintainers' guidance 🙂

[djmitche]

@geofflittle is also working on WASM support, such as in #617, so perhaps there's an opportunity to collaborate?

Regarding the tests, could tokio just be a dev-dependency?

[miguelpduarte]

@geofflittle is also working on WASM support, such as in #617, so perhaps there's an opportunity to collaborate?

Regarding the tests, could tokio just be a dev-dependency?

That's a good point and a very straightforward fix. I guess I missed it because I was just laser-focused on my front-end use-case. I'll update the PR with that soon-ish and then we can see where to take things if the tests start passing with no issues 🙂

[djmitche]

(flag me for review again when this is ready!)

[geofflittle]

Hi-o! Posted a PR that brings us closer to WASM-compatibility: #628. We need Server to be async so that we can write a browser-based impl to provide to Replica.

[djmitche]

Hi @miguelpduarte -- how is it going? I got pretty busy for a bit and lost track of this work. Will you be able to finish it up?

[djmitche]

I ended up landing something like this in #637, so I think this can be closed.

[miguelpduarte]

Hi @miguelpduarte -- how is it going? I got pretty busy for a bit and lost track of this work. Will you be able to finish it up?

@djmitche sorry for not replying earlier, a lot of other things came up, namely at $WORK and I was unfortunately unable to finish this in the meantime. Thanks for following up.

I think that despite #637 there might still be value in this for someone consuming "only the types" defined in TaskChampion, such as when defining or using an API.

I believe we've already discussed this in another location here, so that might be the best place to continue the conversation instead 🙂

Thanks for all the work in TaskChampion!