[ENH] CLI Browse command

[itaismith]

Description of changes

Adding the chroma browse [collection name] command for a TUI app to browse collections.

Arguments:

• collection_name (required) - the collection to browse
• --local - find the collection in a local Chroma server. The CLI will try to connect to a Chroma server on localhost:8000, or stand up a local Chroma frontend if chroma.config.yaml is found in the current working directory.
• path - data path for local Chroma.
• config - path for a config file for local Chroma.
• host - Chroma host with the collection.
• db - the name of the DB with the collection.

If "local" arguments are not provided, the CLI will assume this is a Cloud collection. If in this case db is not provided, the CLI prompts the user for selecting the DB with the collection.

The code for the TUI app is under rust/cli/tui/collection_browser. The main files are:

• app_state.rs - defines the state of the app. It also has functions that handle actions sent by the event handler, that should modify the state of the app.
• events.rs - contains the event handling code in response to different key events, using a sender-receiver pattern. The next method uses tokio::select to handle both UI events and asynchronous operations (loading records, submitting queries). This pattern allows asynchronous operations to not block the UI.
• mod.rs - contains the main app loop. On every iteration, we handle incoming events, fire asynchronous tasks, and draw the UI.

Test plan

• Tests pass locally with pytest for python, yarn test for js, cargo test for rust

Documentation Changes

In a separate PR

[github-actions]

Reviewer Checklist

Please leverage this checklist to ensure your code review is thorough before approving

Testing, Bugs, Errors, Logs, Documentation

• Can you think of any use case in which the code does not behave as intended? Have they been tested?
• Can you think of any inputs or external events that could break the code? Is user input validated and safe? Have they been tested?
• If appropriate, are there adequate property based tests?
• If appropriate, are there adequate unit tests?
• Should any logging, debugging, tracing information be added or removed?
• Are error messages user-friendly?
• Have all documentation changes needed been made?
• Have all non-obvious changes been commented?

System Compatibility

• Are there any potential impacts on other parts of the system or backward compatibility?
• Does this change intersect with any items on our roadmap, and if so, is there a plan for fitting them together?

Quality

• Is this code of a unexpectedly high quality (Readability, Modularity, Intuitiveness)

[HammadB]

Why are these made pub?

[itaismith]

I am constructing this payload for the CLI client's add requests. I can convert to using a new function instead.

[HammadB]

Please don't expose these as pub. It deviates from other payloads. If you want to reuse this struct outside this crate please add a new() function that can package it for you.

[itaismith]

Sounds good. I'll issue a fix shortly