Async Connection: Allow PubSub.run() without previous subscribe()

[kristjanvalur]

Pull Request check-list

• Does $ tox pass with this change (including linting)?
• Do the CI tests pass with this change (enable it first in your forked repo and wait for the github action build to finish)?
• Is the new or changed code fully tested?
• Is a documentation update included (if this change modifies existing APIs, or introduces new ones)?
• Is there an example added to the examples folder (if applicable)?
• Was the change added to CHANGES file?

Description of change

This change adds a "connect()" method to the PubSub class and employs that in the run method.
This makes it possible to start a run() task without knowing beforehand which subscriptions are required,
for example, when running a server that dynamically listens to various channels.

PR is provided as a suggested feature, and so there is no documentation or non-async implementation yet.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #2148 (9543a59) into master (6ba4641) will decrease coverage by 0.07%.
The diff coverage is 92.85%.

@@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #2148 +/- ## ========================================== - Coverage 92.44% 92.37% -0.08%  ========================================== Files 104 104 Lines 24385 24458 +73 ========================================== + Hits 22542 22592 +50  - Misses 1843 1866 +23 

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
tests/test_asyncio/test_pubsub.py	99.34% <90.47%> (-0.43%)	⬇️
redis/asyncio/client.py	91.98% <100.00%> (+0.05%)	⬆️
tests/test_commands.py	93.71% <0.00%> (-0.61%)	⬇️
redis/commands/core.py	83.78% <0.00%> (-0.23%)	⬇️
redis/client.py	89.46% <0.00%> (ø)
redis/asyncio/connection.py	84.72% <0.00%> (ø)
tests/test_cluster.py	97.60% <0.00%> (+0.23%)	⬆️
tests/conftest.py	87.25% <0.00%> (+0.79%)	⬆️
tests/test_function.py	27.58% <0.00%> (+2.28%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6ba4641...9543a59. Read the comment docs.

[chayim]

Thanks @kristjanvalur! This really helps bring more parity to the async connection!

[kristjanvalur]

Well, that was fast :)
If accepted, I was planning to add some docs, and provide a "sync" implementation too. Should I do that in a separate PR?