Allowing boto keys to be passed directly to smart_open (#35)

[asieira]

• Updated smart_open to accept an instance of boto.s3.key.Key as the
  uri parameter.
• Refactored S3OpenRead and S3OpenWrite to require only a
  boto.s3.key.Key instance to work, and get the bucket directly from its
  properties. This is not backwards compatible.
• Commented out test SmartOpenReadTest.test_s3_boto temporarily.

[asieira]

I commented out one of the tests since I'm not very familiar with moto and I'm probably doing something wrong. This is the output I get:

Error
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/Users/asieira/.virtualenvs/smart_open/lib/python2.7/site-packages/mock/mock.py", line 1305, in patched
    return func(*args, **keywargs)
  File "/Users/asieira/Repositorios/smart_open/smart_open/tests/test_smart_open.py", line 139, in test_s3_boto
    smart_open_object = smart_open.smart_open("s3://mybucket/mykey")
  File "/Users/asieira/Repositorios/smart_open/smart_open/smart_open_lib.py", line 111, in smart_open
    return S3OpenRead(key, **kw)
  File "/Users/asieira/Repositorios/smart_open/smart_open/smart_open_lib.py", line 222, in __init__
    if not isinstance(read_key, boto.s3.key.Key):
TypeError: isinstance() arg 2 must be a class, type, or tuple of classes and types

[piskvorky]

Thanks @asieira ! The PR looks great.

That's a weird error, not sure what's going on. Will have to check in more detail.

[asieira]

🙇

[tmylk]

Please uncomment the test as we need to merge them in.

[tmylk]

@asieira

See comments in code. Refer to #45 for examples.

Please add the change description to the CHANGELOG and then it will be ready to merge

[tmylk]

@asieira Thanks for the quick response. Waiting for the commit - going to release today.

[asieira]

There you go, @tmylk !

[asieira]

I see the new version was released as 1.3.1.

I would suggest that in the future the project follow the semantic versioning guidelines, which IMHO is what most developers expect these days. Under these guidelines, since new functionality was introduced by my PR, I believe the release version would have been 1.4.0.

No crisis, just a suggestion for future releases. :) Thanks again for the wonderful project!