[WIP] fix(workload): skip registering wasi 0.2 interfaces in resolved workload

[jtakakura]

Feature or Problem

This pull request updates the plugin registration logic in the workload resolution process to skip registering WASI@0.2 interfaces, in addition to the existing wasmcloud:wash/plugin filter. After the refactor in #73, the registration flow is now implemented within the workload engine, and no longer uses DevPluginManager. The change ensures that unnecessary or conflicting registrations of WASI@0.2 interfaces—which are generally provided by the runtime—are prevented.

Related Issues

Fixes #11

Release Information

next

Consumer Impact

There should be no impact on consumers or dependents. The change only affects internal plugin registration logic and does not alter any public APIs or behavior for plugin authors.

Testing

Unit Test(s)

Unit tests were added to verify that WASI@0.2 interfaces are correctly skipped during registration in the refactored workload engine logic. (See test_resolve_with_plugins_success in crates/wash-runtime/src/engine/workload.rs.)

Acceptance or Integration

No changes to acceptance or integration tests were required.

Manual Verification

• Verified that plugins exporting WASI@0.2 interfaces are not registered.
• Confirmed that standard plugin exports are still registered as expected.
• Checked that no runtime errors occur when plugins contain both custom and WASI@0.2 exports.

[jtakakura]

@brooksmtownsend I have added regex to the dependencies.

1. Is there any issue or concern with this addition?
2. If not, could you please confirm whether my entry in Cargo.toml is correct?

[brooksmtownsend]

Hey @jtakakura thank you so much for taking this on! Quite honestly, I need to give it a better look, but I would suggest holding off for now because #73 is going to cause you pain here to rebase. Hope that's ok!

[jtakakura]

@brooksmtownsend Thank you for your reply!
I understand your suggestion and will put this on hold until #73 is completed.

[brooksmtownsend]

Okay @jtakakura ready to go! Thank you for your patience, #73 now merged

[jtakakura]

@brooksmtownsend Thank you for merging #73!
I have finished updating my changes to match the refactored code after #73.

Also, I have two questions about my implementation:

• I added the regex crate for version matching. Is this acceptable for the project? If not, could you suggest a better way?
• The code skips versions like 0.2.0 and 0.2.1 (that is, 0.2.x), but it does not handle cases like 0.2.0-draft. Is this okay, or should we support these cases too?

Let me know what you think!