Remove wasmtime-jit

[adambratschikaye]

This refactoring has been discussed here: #7652

The wasmtime-jit crate is removed by moving the platform agnostic parts to wasmtime-environ and the remaining parts to wasmtime.

The goal of this is to simplify the crate organization and make it possible to add a runtime feature to the wasmtime crate such that wasmtime can be build without the runtime feature to enable Wasm compilation on targets that may not support actual Wasm execution (e.g. wasm32 itself). A follow-up PR will add this feature.

[adambratschikaye]

There are two main commits with the first one moving parts into environ and the second moving the remaining parts to wasmtime. If you'd prefer I could submit those as two separate PRs.

[alexcrichton]

Looks great to me, thanks again for working on this!

[alexcrichton]

Ah so this sort of refatoring is likely to break various bits and pieces of CI, so if you'd like you can push a commit with the phrase "prtest:full" somewhere in the commit message and that'll force full CI to run on this PR instead of just the few builders. That way you should be able to weed out all the build failures before it goes through the merge queue.

[github-actions]

Subscribe to Label Action

cc @peterhuene

Details

This issue or pull request has been labeled: "wasmtime:api", "wasmtime:config", "wasmtime:docs"

Thus the following users have been cc'd because of the following labels:

• peterhuene: wasmtime:api

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this label, edit the .github/subscribe-to-label.json configuration file.

Learn more.

[github-actions]

Label Messager: wasmtime:config

It looks like you are changing Wasmtime's configuration options. Make sure to
complete this check list:

• If you added a new Config method, you wrote extensive documentation for
  it.

  Details

  Our documentation should be of the following form:

  Short, simple summary sentence.
  
  More details. These details can be multiple paragraphs. There should be
  information about not just the method, but its parameters and results as
  well.
  
  Is this method fallible? If so, when can it return an error?
  
  Can this method panic? If so, when does it panic?
  
  # Example
  
  Optional example here.
  

• If you added a new Config method, or modified an existing one, you
  ensured that this configuration is exercised by the fuzz targets.

  Details

  For example, if you expose a new strategy for allocating the next instance
  slot inside the pooling allocator, you should ensure that at least one of our
  fuzz targets exercises that new strategy.

  Often, all that is required of you is to ensure that there is a knob for this
  configuration option in wasmtime_fuzzing::Config (or one
  of its nested structs).

  Rarely, this may require authoring a new fuzz target to specifically test this
  configuration. See our docs on fuzzing for more details.

• If you are enabling a configuration option by default, make sure that it
  has been fuzzed for at least two weeks before turning it on by default.

---

Details

To modify this label's message, edit the .github/label-messager/wasmtime-config.md file.

To add new label messages or remove existing label messages, edit the
.github/label-messager.json configuration file.

Learn more.

[adambratschikaye]

Looks like the full pipeline is passing now.