Allow providing your own ContentsAPI implementation for the emscripten DriveFS

[martinRenou]

This PR allows jupyterlite/xeus#87.

• Allow easily overwriting the ContentsAPI implementation in the DriveFS
• Extract the logic from broadcast.ts which processes the driveFS request, so that it's easily reusable in another implementation

[github-actions]

👈 Try it on ReadTheDocs

[martinRenou]

Converting into draft. I want to make extra testing on this before continuing.

[martinRenou]

It looks like making backward incompatible changes to the DriveFS will break the UI-tests here because it's using pyodide-kernel which builds against a specific DriveFS version.

It's fine in this PR because I'd like it to be backward compatible, but it may be annoying some day if we want to make intentional breaking changes.

[martinRenou]

This is ready for review. The UI-tests failure appear on the main branch too, fixing it in #1390

[martinRenou]

CI is passing now @jtpio

[martinRenou]

I understand we have no choice to cast here. It seems you're casting to any in https://github.com/jupyter-lsp/jupyterlab-lsp/pull/278/files#diff-7c7804a4b99d4b67b07ab518d033a6de85bdbf291e5e03400106901ff2501d5aR30.

[martinRenou]

From outside calls of processDriveRequest, the response type is correctly computed.

[martinRenou]

@bollwyvl please tell me what you think!

[martinRenou]

Friendly ping!

[afshin]

Since "contents" in our API language is typically plural, I would suggest renaming drivecontent.ts to drivecontents.ts

[martinRenou]

I just rebased (and squashed to make my life easier during the rebase).

Thanks @afshin I resolved it.

[jtpio]

Thanks!

Let's get this in and released in the next alpha, so it can be tested downstream.

@martinRenou @bollwyvl please feel free to open a new issue or PR if something needs to be changed or fixed, thanks!

[michaelweinold]

@martinRenou, could you help me make sense of this new feature?

Following a quick search, I was unable to find documentation on ContentsAPI functionality.
From your changes, I see, that:

jupyterlite/packages/contents/src/drivefs.ts

Line 375 in a9dc320

this._driveName = driveName;

1. Would this allow me to chose a different file system as default for my JupyterLite site?
2. Is this PR at all related to other efforts related to the file system, like:

• Switch to Contents.IDrive for the JupyterLite in-browser contents manager #1041

For context: I am still looking for a good way to use sqlite3 databases in the default directory - which is currently not possible, as per:

• Error when trying to use sqlite3 pyodide-kernel#35