Add room storage for Django Channels Consumers

[cacosandon]

This PR introduces a shared storage for consumers within Django Channels.

Initially, each YjsConsumer had its unique YDoc, updating only from its client. This approach caused issues, such as consumers having different YDoc versions that made difficult to update to a persistent storage.

Now, by inheriting from BaseYRoomStorage, a unified storage can be utilized across all consumers and server-wide (e.g., in a Django Celery Job).

The storage's function, detailed in the documentation, is to manage document changes—fetching, updating, and saving them to a single source. An implementation example features Redis for ephemeral and Postgres for permanent storage.

Each user can define their own storage. Maybe using Django Cache, custom Redis or no storage at all (and just use it to broadcast updates from their connected clients). We just define the interface.

I would like to add some tests too 🤔 but not sure how.

[zswaff]

@cacosandon incredible! Seems great to me. I have a variety of nits/suggestions but nothing too important on my end.

I was able to manually test a bit but we're still working on changes to the main ypy lib and those are blocking us from using this solution end to end. Once we get to that point we'll get this working in production, and in theory we might encounter some snags--I'll keep you posted. It seems like it will probably work though.

I hear you about automated tests here but I don't have any super concrete/brilliant suggestions, maybe someone on the main project will.

After you do whichever of my comments you agree with, you could just merge this and then open a new PR from this repo against the main fork and just copy in your description I guess?

[cacosandon]

@cacosandon incredible! Seems great to me. I have a variety of nits/suggestions but nothing too important on my end.

I was able to manually test a bit but we're still working on changes to the main ypy lib and those are blocking us from using this solution end to end. Once we get to that point we'll get this working in production, and in theory we might encounter some snags--I'll keep you posted. It seems like it will probably work though.

I hear you about automated tests here but I don't have any super concrete/brilliant suggestions, maybe someone on the main project will.

After you do whichever of my comments you agree with, you could just merge this and then open a new PR from this repo against the main fork and just copy in your description I guess?

Just applied all the changes you mentioned! Thanks for the review.

In a couple of hours I will test it with my codebase and if it's all good, then I will merge and create a PR in the original repo.