[FEA] Expose storage_options kwarg to readers/writers

[ayushdg]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
cuDF supports reading/writing to multiple data locations aided by fsspec. Reading data from remote source like cloud storage often requires additional kwargs passed to fsspec via the storage_options argument which is not exposed directly in cuDF but is a hidden kwarg.

Since v1.2, pandas has transitioned to using fsspec for a lot of file handling operations and now exposes the storage_options argument.

Describe the solution you'd like
cuDF can therefore expose this argument rather than using it as a hidden kwarg.

Describe alternatives you've considered
N/A

Additional context
Here are a couple of examples for pandas exposing storage_options from their docs: read_csv , to_parquet.

[github-actions]

This issue has been marked stale due to no recent activity in the past 30d. Please close this issue if no further response or action is needed. Otherwise, please respond with a comment indicating any updates or changes to the original issue and/or confirm this issue still needs to be addressed. This issue will be marked rotten if there is no activity in the next 60d.

[ayushdg]

Can tackle once pandas requirements are updated (being worked on in #7375).

[github-actions]

This issue has been labeled inactive-30d due to no recent activity in the past 30 days. Please close this issue if no further response or action is needed. Otherwise, please respond with a comment indicating any updates or changes to the original issue and/or confirm this issue still needs to be addressed. This issue will be labeled inactive-90d if there is no activity in the next 60 days.

[vuule]

The prerequisite PR has been merged.
@ayushdg, should I move this to 0.20?

[ayushdg]

Thanks for the ping @vuule. Pushing to 0.20 seems fine. Shouldn't impact workflows, since we already support it when passed via kwargs, but don't explicitly have it as an argument.

[chinmaychandak]

This will be really useful!

[ayushdg]

@chinmaychandak passing storage_options is already supported today. It just isn't exposed explicitly as a param, which this issue is meant to address.
Is storage_options not working for you for certain Io methods?

[chinmaychandak]

No, I meant exposing this as an explicit param would be really useful. Not a blocker by any means.