Should the _manual-tls feature include enabling reqwest?

[benalleng]

In the payjoin crate our Cargo.toml states

rust-payjoin/payjoin/Cargo.toml

Lines 38 to 39 in 332755b

	io = ["v2", "reqwest/rustls-tls"]
	_manual-tls = ["reqwest/rustls-tls", "rustls"]

but the only place this is used for is

rust-payjoin/payjoin/src/core/io.rs

Lines 44 to 65 in 332755b

	#[cfg(feature = "_manual-tls")]
	pub async fn fetch_ohttp_keys_with_cert(
	ohttp_relay: impl IntoUrl,
	payjoin_directory: impl IntoUrl,
	cert_der: &[u8],
	) -> Result<OhttpKeys, Error> {
	let ohttp_keys_url = payjoin_directory.into_url()?.join("/.well-known/ohttp-gateway")?;
	let proxy = Proxy::all(ohttp_relay.into_url()?.as_str())?;
	let client = Client::builder()
	.use_rustls_tls()
	.add_root_certificate(reqwest::tls::Certificate::from_der(cert_der)?)
	.proxy(proxy)
	.http1_only()
	.build()?;
	let res = client
	.get(ohttp_keys_url)
	.timeout(Duration::from_secs(10))
	.header(ACCEPT, "application/ohttp-keys")
	.send()
	.await?;
	parse_ohttp_keys_response(res).await
	}

Should we require this to be gated behind both io and _manual-tls with a

#[cfg(all(feature = "_manual-tls", feature = "io"))]

Or can the reqwest dep just be safely removed already since it is inside of io.rs?

With this change we would be able to completely close #1124 following the merge of #1377

Right now in benalleng:url-rewrite the following command still shows a build dep of url without the io feature (while _manual-tls and _test-utils are dev features they are not explicitly io so I want to make sure that it is foolproof)

cargo tree -p payjoin --no-default-features --features v1,v2,directory,_manual-tls,_test-utils -i url -e no-dev,no-build

[spacebear21]

Should we require this to be gated behind both io and _manual-tls with a #[cfg(all(feature = "_manual-tls", feature = "io"))]

The whole io module is gated behind the io feature, so wouldn't this be redundant?

[benalleng]

Yeah I realized that, I opted to just drop the reqwest requirement in the Cargo.toml for _manual-tls