replace futures crate api with standard library

[tottoto]

Replaces futures crate's APIs with the corresponding ones in the standard library.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 94.44444% with 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 72.0%. Comparing base (5dce83b) to head (902cab5).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

❗ Current head 902cab5 differs from pull request most recent head 75d3cdd. Consider uploading reports for the commit 75d3cdd to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##            main   #1461     +/-   ##
=======================================
- Coverage   72.1%   72.0%   -0.1%     
=======================================
  Files         78      78             
  Lines       6592    6570     -22     
=======================================
- Hits        4747    4724     -23     
- Misses      1845    1846      +1     

Files	Coverage Δ
kube-client/src/client/middleware/mod.rs	94.0% <100.0%> (ø)
kube-client/src/client/mod.rs	74.4% <100.0%> (ø)
kube-runtime/src/controller/future_hash_map.rs	95.5% <ø> (ø)
kube-runtime/src/controller/runner.rs	95.2% <ø> (ø)
kube-runtime/src/reflector/mod.rs	100.0% <ø> (ø)
kube-runtime/src/scheduler.rs	97.2% <100.0%> (ø)
kube-runtime/src/utils/delayed_init.rs	97.3% <100.0%> (-0.1%)	⬇️
kube-runtime/src/utils/event_flatten.rs	92.2% <100.0%> (-0.2%)	⬇️
kube-runtime/src/utils/event_modify.rs	95.7% <100.0%> (-0.1%)	⬇️
kube-runtime/src/utils/mod.rs	62.3% <100.0%> (-0.6%)	⬇️
... and 7 more

[clux]

is there a benefit to moving to the std::pin::pin? from looking at the example code it only seems to make the code slightly more awkward