feat: add ipnet support

[BeauGieskens]

Fixes #2150.

I chose to favour ipnet over ipnetwork if both features are used, because it seems more widely used and actually has a stable release.

[BeauGieskens]

Forgive me, it's my first time making a serious pull request to this project. I'll find some time later to recreate the failing tests locally and fix what I can.

[abonander]

I chose to favour ipnet over ipnetwork if both features are used, because it seems more widely used and actually has a stable release.

That actually makes it a breaking change, which would mean waiting until 0.9.0.

[BeauGieskens]

That actually makes it a breaking change, which would mean waiting until 0.9.0.

I see that it's breaking, but I figure it's only if someone is already trying to use the currently non-existent ipnet feature alongside ipnetwork. Unless I'm missing something.

Either way, it's fine with me if this waits until 0.9.0 :)

[abonander]

Because of Cargo's feature unification, if any crate that depends on SQLx in the dependency tree turns on a feature, it is forced on for all crates that depend on it.

This has caused issues before: #3412 (comment)

Thus it's probably best that it doesn't take precedent unless it needs to. I'm working on a way around this in #3383 but it's better if the user doesn't need to do this in the first place. If it's the other way around and they want to use ipnet over ipnetwork then it's likely something they're specifically opting into, not a breakage they have to fix.

[BeauGieskens]

Thanks for the helpful explanation, I learned something new today and I agree with your preference.

I've swapped it around so ipnetwork is preferred. It's just as well because I noticed a spot where I previously had the precedence the wrong way around.

[BeauGieskens]

I'm just looking to confirm that this is ready for another review, for clarity's sake. As far as I understand it, after my last commit, this PR no longer consitutes a breaking change.