Add dynamic fields to Snowflake connection

[sunkickr]

Adds form fields and custom form behavior for the Snowflake connection so it is more obvious to new users what fields need to be filled out. Also the doc_strings for the hook are updated to reflect the params along with helpful information using sphinx directives. I have categorized the fields below to explain the change.

Fields/inputs Used by the average user

Conn Id
Conn Type
Host
Schema
Login
Password
account
database
region

Fields/inputs not used by user

Port

Fields/inputs not used by user but reflected in code(not used by average user)

role
authenticator
private_key_field
session_parameters
aws_access_key_id
aws_secret_access_key(secret)

Proposal

• Add fields used by the average user, remove fields not used by the users, and allow users to use extras for fields that are not used by average user unless the input is a secret because of Add custom Salesforce connection type #8766
• Add fields for aws_accces_key_id and aws_secret_access_key because aws secret key is a secret
• Add placeholders so users have a little more information on fields
  ex. Login: "your snowflake username"

screenshot:

Ideally aws_accces_key_id and aws_secret_access_key would be stored in Extra because they are not used by the average user. A feature in the UI that allows users to obfuscate the Extra field is needed for secretes to be stored there.

This PR is related to #14631 (comment) where something went wrong during rebase and the PR closed.

[github-actions]

The Workflow run is cancelling this PR. It has some failed jobs matching ^Pylint$,^Static checks,^Build docs$,^Spell check docs$,^Backport packages$,^Provider packages,^Checks: Helm tests$,^Test OpenAPI*.

[sunkickr]

@kaxil thank you!

[sunkickr]

The run associated with this PR appears to have failed because of secuity issue?
Running job on this worker disallowed by security policy

[kaxil]

Just re-started the test, let's see

[kaxil]

Just re-started the test, let's see.

GH is experiencing issues at the moment: https://www.githubstatus.com/

[turbaszek]

@sunkickr I'm not sure if having AWS stuff in Snowflake connection is good idea. In future there can be any XtoSnowflake operator, will we be extending the list?

[sunkickr]

@sunkickr I'm not sure if having AWS stuff in Snowflake connection is good idea. In future there can be any XtoSnowflake operator, will we be extending the list?

@turbaszek I agree that the AWS stuff shouldn't be in the connection, but the S3ToSnowflakeOperator is currently written in a way that requires this(I think). I thought rewriting the S3ToSnowflakeOperator was beyond the scope of this PR. Other transfers could have users set up a connection for each service so we wouldn't need to extend the list.

[turbaszek]

Looks good! As discussed it may be worth to decouple aws from sf but that's definitely out of scope here 👌

[turbaszek]

@sunkickr can you please rebase onto current master to rerun all builds?

[github-actions]

The PR most likely needs to run full matrix of tests because it modifies parts of the core of Airflow. However, committers might decide to merge it quickly and take the risk. If they don't merge it quickly - please rebase it to the latest master at your convenience, or amend the last commit of the PR, and push it with --force-with-lease.

[sunkickr]

@sunkickr can you please rebase onto current master to rerun all builds?

Thank you for the review! I can do that

[boring-cyborg]

Awesome work, congrats on your first merged pull request!