Allow passing additional kwargs for Azure writes

[ddelange]

Title

Allow passing additional kwargs for Azure writes

Motivation

• Fixes Allow specifying metadata for azure uploads #701

Tests

Tests that smart_open.azure.Writer accepts metadata, and retrieving it afterwards (with FakeBlobClient.get_blob_properties).

Checklist

Before you create the PR, please make sure you have:

• Picked a concise, informative and complete title
• Clearly explained the motivation behind the PR
• Linked to any existing issues that your PR will be solving
• Included tests for any new functionality
• Checked that all unit tests pass

Workflow

Please avoid rebasing and force-pushing to the branch of the PR once a review is in progress.
Rebasing can make your commits look a bit cleaner, but it also makes life more difficult from the reviewer, because they are no longer able to distinguish between code that has already been reviewed, and unreviewed code.

[ddelange]

@mpenkov is there something I can do to move this along?

[MacHu-GWU]

@ddelange I am thinking similar things. Instead of using a optional arguments called blog_kwargs, I think smart_open should use a more general param name like rw_kwargs, and it pass down to all kinds of low level Python API. no matter it is a local FS, Azure, AWS, FTP etc ...

[ddelange]

Although I wouldnt mind a unified API, I think that would be a bigger refactor (and major breaking change) to achieve that. Especially for s3, the mechanism is currently substantially different. See e.g. passing ACL, StorageClass, Metadata here in 3x def upload for azure,gcs,s3: https://github.com/stevearc/pypicloud/pull/304/files

For now, this PR is minimally invasive. Maybe it makes sense to open a separate issue linked to #701?

[ddelange]

@mpenkov any thoughts?

[ddelange]

@mpenkov could you please have a look?

[mpenkov]

Looks good to me, thank you!

[mpenkov]

OK, I've merged the changes.

Sorry for the delay, I've been busy with other parts of my life.

[ddelange]

thanks and no problem!

[ddelange]

@mpenkov could you push a release?

[mpenkov]

@ddelange Looks like there's some sort of build problem: I need to fix this before making a release. Not sure when I'll get around to it, will try next week.

https://github.com/RaRe-Technologies/smart_open/runs/7574213524?check_suite_focus=true

(not sure, it looks like it may not be related to this PR)

[piskvorky]

I've seen that warning before. chardet reached a new major version (5.x) and it caused an incompatibility with requests. What helped in my case was upgrading requests to the latest version. Are we pinning chardet or requests to a specific version?

Probably unrelated to the S3 error though (just a warning).

[ddelange]

interesting to see a warning about chardet, as requests>=2.26 doesnt depend on chardet anymore ref.

also dont see chardet / requests being installed here 🤔 https://github.com/RaRe-Technologies/smart_open/runs/7574213524?check_suite_focus=true#step:5:204

[ddelange]

can it be that the contents of this public bucket changed, and those keys are simply not there anymore?

[mpenkov]

Yes, it appears so.

[mpenkov]

@ddelange https://pypi.org/project/smart-open/6.1.0/

[ddelange]

@mpenkov thanks for the quick fix and release! 💥