Depend on wider arrow versions, add integration test

[nicklan]

This widens our arrow dependency and adds a basic integration test.

Note that the patching workflow is not 100% ideal as it requires a version specification that reduces to exactly one version. I don't think there's a way around this, so we may want to in the future adjust to a feature flag based approach. That's a lot more work though, so we'll do this for now and unblock people using older arrow versions, and then iterate if needed.

At this point, the test just makes sure we can compile (and run a trivial program) with all the versions of arrow we say we support. It creates an arrow schema and a kernel schema, and then compares them to make sure the versions work together.

The testing script pulls all versions of arrow, checks that it's in the range we support, then seds each one into the integration-test's Cargo.toml as both the required version of arrow and as the versions in the [patch] section. Then compiles and runs the crate.

Reviewers, recommend you also look at the workflow jobs triggered to see what the tests do.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 78.28%. Comparing base (284db10) to head (4a3b76d).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #366   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   78.28%   78.28%           
=======================================
  Files          50       50           
  Lines       10292    10292           
  Branches    10292    10292           
=======================================
  Hits         8057     8057           
  Misses       1781     1781           
  Partials      454      454           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[nicklan]

this feels... wrong, but it does seem to work. upstream crates would use the patch.crates-io way anyway

[zachschuermann]

LGTM and appreciate the clear docs! let's merge for 0.4.0 and then iterate?

[scovich]

Not a cargo expert, but the idea is laudable and I don't see any obvious problems with the changes