Add deferrable BatchOperator

[rajaths010494]

This PR donates the following BatchOperator deferrable developed in astronomer-providers repo to apache airflow.

[rajaths010494]

#30489
cc @potiuk

[potiuk]

Added label. Closed and reopened to rebuild for all python versions

[pankajkoti]

@vincbeck will you please be able to review this PR? I see you had reviewed #29300 but then it was reverted with #30489 and this is another attempt at adding the deferrable mode to BatchOperator.

[vincbeck]

There are multiple work in parallel to add deferrable operators in Amazon provider package. I do not think there is one better way than the other but I definitely think we should all follow the same pattern for consistency purposes. @syedahsn has been working on adding support for deferrable operators in Amazon provider package in #30032. For instance, he does not create a separate hook for all async operations which I agree with because, I think, having two hooks per service (one for sync operations, one for async operations) would be adding too many files and end up making the amazon provider package harder to maintain.

As a result, I would try to follow the pattern initiated in #30032 while in the meantime we should also try to merge ASAP #30032 to avoid this kind of situation again.

[pankajkoti]

@vincbeck Thanks Vincent for the visibility on #30032. On our(Astronomer's) end too, we're building/donating quite a few deferrable operators across various providers and would like to also see if most people agree to the pattern, then we could use this pattern not only for Amazon providers but for other providers too. Just curious to know if there was a prior discussion somewhere regarding following this pattern.

I see that we're still keeping the AwsBaseAsyncHook in the hooks in the PR which this PR leverages. I would like to create another PR for the cleanup later but for now, would request that in the meantime to review the other work if it looks good.

cc: @pankajastro @phanikumv @kaxil 👆🏽 Please take a look at the pattern of using a single class for the hook with deferrable param for its methods and would appreciate your thoughts on it.

[vincbeck]

Just curious to know if there was a prior discussion somewhere regarding following this pattern.

Not that I am aware of. I think the discussion actually happened in #30032

[potiuk]

I just merged #30032 - so maybe that's a good time to align the approach @vincbeck @rajaths010494. Similar discussions happened befor when Astronomer was donating deferrable operators to Google Provider so maybe the learnings from those discussions and agreening on how to approahc Amazon provider coould be done here as well cc: @kaxil

[syedahsn]

In #30032, I added a README.md that goes over our approach for writing deferrable operators for AMPP. Feel free to go over that document, and let me know if something is missing. I'd love to help out if you're running into any issues!

[pankajkoti]

@pankajastro as discussed please check the approach mentioned here.

[pankajastro]

@pankajastro as discussed please check the approach mentioned here.

@pankajkoti @syedahsn will appreciate your feedback on #30865

[pankajkoti]

We can close this in favour of #30865

cc: @potiuk