WIP: Initial V0 storage node API grpc spec

[zehiko]

What

In this PR we aim to define initial version of the V0 storage node APIs in the form of grpc protobuf definition. We also want to:

• settle on code generation
• type conversions (between rerun internal types and grpc types

(currently) Example usage:

use re_storage_types::v0::{
    storage_node_client::StorageNodeClient, RegisterRecordingsRequest
};

...

  let mut client = StorageNodeClient::connect("http://127.0.0.1:51234")
        .await
        .unwrap();

    let resp = client
        .register_recordings(RegisterRecordingsRequest {
            description: "test".to_string(),
            storage_url: "dna.rrd".to_string(),
            typ: re_storage_types::v0::RecordingType::Rrd.into(),
        })
        .await
        .unwrap()
        .into_inner();

Checklist

• I have read and agree to Contributor Guide and the Code of Conduct
• I've included a screenshot or gif (if applicable)
• I have tested the web demo (if applicable):
  • Using examples from latest main build: rerun.io/viewer
  • Using full set of examples from nightly build: rerun.io/viewer
• The PR title and labels are set such as to maximize their usefulness for the next release's CHANGELOG
• If applicable, add a new check to the release checklist!
• If have noted any breaking changes to the log API in CHANGELOG.md and the migration guide

• PR Build Summary
• Recent benchmark results
• Wasm size tracking

To run all checks from main, comment on the PR with @rerun-bot full-check.

[github-actions]

Deployed docs

Commit	Link
eac1888	https://landing-k16d3bte5-rerun.vercel.app/docs

[teh-cmc]

Im inferring from the big "WIP" in the title that this is a draft 😶 -- marking as such to unclog the review queue.

[teh-cmc]

LGTM! I like where this is going.

• I don't like the names re_storage_types and re_storage_types_builder, in fact I just don't like "storage" in general. Whatever, I don't think that matters in the slightest right now.
• Very happy about the codegen setup (unsurprisingly).
• Very happy about the duplicated types (unsurprisingly).
• Naming of all things will need some love in general, but we can do that later.

[zehiko]

(acidentally) closed in favour of #7674