feat(event_handler): Allow the ApiGatewayResolver to support an existing subclass of BaseProxyEvent

[BVMiko]

Issue number: #3267

Summary

Changes

Allow the ApiGatewayResolver to support an existing subclass of BaseProxyEvent. The existing subclass can be a custom implementation, and allows overriding the route matching logic

User experience

Examples were posted in the linked issue #3267

Checklist

If your change doesn't seem to apply, please leave them unchecked.

• Meet tenets criteria
• I have performed a self-review of this change
• Changes have been tested
• Changes are documented
• PR title follows conventional commit semantics

Is this a breaking change?

RFC issue number:

Checklist:

• Migration process documented
• Implement warnings (if it can live side by side)

Acknowledgment

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

Disclaimer: We value your time and bandwidth. As such, any pull requests created on non-triaged issues might not be successful.

[sonarcloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
1.2% Duplication

[heitorlessa]

hey @BVMiko apologies on behalf of the team, we dropped the ball in coming back with a timely counter-offer for this extension.

How about we work on a RFC to make it possible to route anything with a generic Event Handler?

While this applies to you, we already had customers telling us in private that they'd love an Event Handler for EventBridge, S3, Step Functions, SNS, etc.

It'd be great to have a way to (1) specify which key(s) of the event to do the routing, and (2) declare the shape of the event available in current_event.

That way, we can have a dedicated documentation for this, and future-proof new Event Handler specializations as it gets popular, just like we have REST and GraphQL Event Handlers today.

What do you say?

[heitorlessa]

Bringing this up to your inbox in case you missed it - would love to hear your thoughts

[Tankanow]

@heitorlessa, is there any movement on the Generic Router? I would love this feature for all the reasons you've mentioned in other comments. I'm happy to help out if needed.

[heitorlessa]

@heitorlessa, is there any movement on the Generic Router? I would love this feature for all the reasons you've mentioned in other comments. I'm happy to help out if needed.

sadly no, we're short staffed so we'd appreciate any help -- I'd start with a RFC to account for 1/ ability to select multiple fields for routing an event to a function, 2/ generics to allow any data class/model to be used for app.current_event, 3/ ability to have middlewares.

More than happy for this to be a completely new thing as we split off from the single file issue of Event Handler in v3.

[Tankanow]

@heitorlessa, is there any movement on the Generic Router? I would love this feature for all the reasons you've mentioned in other comments. I'm happy to help out if needed.

sadly no, we're short staffed so we'd appreciate any help -- I'd start with a RFC to account for 1/ ability to select multiple fields for routing an event to a function, 2/ generics to allow any data class/model to be used for app.current_event, 3/ ability to have middlewares.

More than happy for this to be a completely new thing as we split off from the single file issue of Event Handler in v3.

@heitorlessa, this sounds like a great start. I'll start working on an RFC.

[leandrodamascena]

Hi @Tankanow! How is it going? I'd like to see if you have any updates to share regarding this new RFC.

Thanks!

[Tankanow]

Hi @leandrodamascena,

Thanks for the ping. I just got back from a long vacation. I'm going to start work on it this week.