Implement SFTPSensorAsync

[tseruga]

Addresses #629

Implements a basic, functional asynchronous SFTPSensor using asyncssh.

First time contributor here, so open to feedback on style and technical decisions around how these operators are generally formatted/created.

closes #629

[tseruga]

Will address failures

[bharanidharan14]

Hi @tseruga. Thanks for contributing to this project and creating this PR. We will definitely take a look at this PR and share the feedback.

[tseruga]

Unsure of how to address the remaining build failures:
build_docs is complaining about my usage of * in my doc-strings. I annotated the line so the static checker locally doesn't complain about it, but I'm not sure if there's another annotation I should use for build-docs to accept it. I can also remove it if it's just easier to link to the fnmatch docs instead of having the info in the doc-string itself.

mypy is complaining about type hints due to class inheritance. The parent SFTP sensor class expects Optional[SFTPHook] but I'm overriding the hook with the new custom async hook SFTPHookAsync, which is a child of SFTPHook.

There also numerous errors from mypy which aren't due to my changes. Not sure what to do about those

[bharanidharan14]

For the build docs failure, you need to add the .rst file for sftp sensor in docs/providers (follow dbt or http sensors)
and you need to make an entry in docs/providers/index.rst as well

[bharanidharan14]

@tseruga For docs failure,
You need to add sftp in docs/providers/index.rst and you need to create folder sftp as I mentioned in the earlier comment

For mypy failure, which is not related to your changes , that is covered in one of the PR once it is merged it will cover

[tseruga]

Im clearly missing something obvious with sphinx docs. I've added an entry to the providers/index.rst but it still seems to be building the docs incorrectly for sftp. I've looked for an inconsistencies compared to other providers, but can't find it. I'm sure it's something small

[pankajastro]

Im clearly missing something obvious with sphinx docs. I've added an entry to the providers/index.rst but it still seems to be building the docs incorrectly for sftp. I've looked for an inconsistencies compared to other providers, but can't find it. I'm sure it's something small

Docs build should be working now (c1db648). mypy will be fixed by #659

[pankajastro]

Any thoughts on how we will run this in our integration tests? I think we may take this in separate PR, I have created an issue to track it #662 @phanikumv @rajaths010494 @bharanidharan14

[pankajastro]

Please update/rebase your branch.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Base: 98.36% // Head: 98.38% // Increases project coverage by +0.02% 🎉

Coverage data is based on head (69de543) compared to base (d0055cb).
Patch coverage: 99.13% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #654      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   98.36%   98.38%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          81       84       +3     
  Lines        4223     4339     +116     
==========================================
+ Hits         4154     4269     +115     
- Misses         69       70       +1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
astronomer/providers/sftp/hooks/sftp.py	98.33% <98.33%> (ø)
astronomer/providers/sftp/sensors/sftp.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
astronomer/providers/sftp/triggers/sftp.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[tseruga]

Ill look through the missed lines and add some tests

[tseruga]

Surprised 97.4% coverage still fails the check 😆 I can cover the missing lines

[pankajastro]

Thanks @tseruga for addressing the comments. Looking great 🚀

[pankajastro]

This is awesome, thanks @tseruga 👏 for creating the PR. Appreciate it.

[rajaths010494]

Awesome work @tseruga , congrats on your first merged pull request!

[tseruga]

Thanks @pankajastro @rajaths010494 @bharanidharan14 !

Hopefully will be contributing more in the future!