[AIRFLOW-4175] S3Hook load_file should support ACL policy parameter

[OmairK]

- Added acl_policy parameter to all the S3Hook.load_*() and S3Hook.copy_object() functions
- Added unittest to test the response permissions when the policy is passed
- Updated the docstring of the function

---

Issue link: AIRFLOW-4175

Make sure to mark the boxes below before creating PR: [x]

• Description above provides context of the change
• Commit message/PR title starts with [AIRFLOW-NNNN]. AIRFLOW-NNNN = JIRA ID^*
• Unit tests coverage for changes (not needed for documentation changes)
• Commits follow "How to write a good git commit message"
• Relevant documentation is updated including usage instructions.
• I will engage committers as explained in Contribution Workflow Example.

^* For document-only changes commit message can start with [AIRFLOW-XXXX].

---

In case of fundamental code change, Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in UPDATING.md.
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.

[potiuk]

It looks good. But one thing - can you also extend the tests to verify that the default "private" acl has also the right permissions ?

[OmairK]

It looks good. But one thing - can you also extend the tests to verify that the default "private" acl has also the right permissions ?

You are talking about the copy_object() hook ?

[feluelle]

I am sorry, but this is a duplicate. #7635 already adds ACL Header.

[OmairK]

I am sorry, but this is a duplicate. #7635 already adds ACL Header.

@feluelle I have already completed the task and made the changes @potiuk suggested, and since this issue was not explicitly assigned to anybody I have been working on this issue for the past 2 days.

[potiuk]

I think we can combine the two.. There are more tests in this one - so I think we should use it :). @retornam - how about you review this one instead of merging yours :)? Let's join forces.

[potiuk]

@OmairK -> I think you will have to rebase and push the branch again so that we can re-open it.

[OmairK]

@OmairK -> I think you will have to rebase and push the branch again so that we can re-open it.

@potiuk I have rebased and forced pushed the branch.

[potiuk]

And BTW - both @OmairK and @retornam can be co-authors of the change https://help.github.com/en/github/committing-changes-to-your-project/creating-a-commit-with-multiple-authors - we've done that multiple times and this is true open-source spirit ... - so why don't you add @retornam co-author line to the change :)?

[potiuk]

Somehow I can't re-open it :(. Likely you need to reopen it yourself @OmairK or create a new one with new branch name

[retornam]

@OmairK I can close mine, when you submit a new PR.

[OmairK]

And BTW - both @OmairK and @retornam can be co-authors of the change https://help.github.com/en/github/committing-changes-to-your-project/creating-a-commit-with-multiple-authors - we've done that multiple times and this is true open-source spirit ... - so why don't you add @retornam co-author line to the change :)?

Sure I will do that right now.

@OmairK I can close mine, when you submit a new PR.

Thanks @retornam 😄

[feluelle]

Thank you @retornam and @OmairK for co-authoring this :) 👍

So #7733 is the new one and we can close #7635, right?

[potiuk]

Right @feluelle !