[FEATURE] Support for AWS EventBridge Event-Bus

[wiljafor1]

Why do we need this improvement?

Currently, async-api lacks support for AWS EventBridge Event-Bus, which prevents teams using EventBridge from fully leveraging async-api to document and describe their event-driven architectures in a standardized way. Adding this support would make async-api more flexible and aligned with modern AWS event-driven architectures.

How will this change help?

By introducing AWS EventBridge Event-Bus as a supported binding, users will be able to describe and document their AWS event-driven architectures using async-api. This would streamline the process of defining event buses, rules, and targets, making it easier to integrate with AWS’s native event service.

Screenshots

(Not applicable for this request, but could be added once implemented.)

How could it be implemented/designed?

The feature could be implemented by extending the existing async-api bindings to include AWS EventBridge. Parameters like the event bus name, event rules, and potential target configurations could be added to the specification, allowing users to define how their EventBridge interacts with their system.

🚧 Breaking changes

No

👀 Have you checked for similar open issues?

• [X] I checked and didn't find a similar issue

🏢 Have you read the Contributing Guidelines?

• [X] I have read the Contributing Guidelines

Are you willing to work on this issue?

Yes I am willing to submit a PR!

[github-actions[bot]]

Welcome to AsyncAPI. Thanks a lot for reporting your first issue. Please check out our contributors guide and the instructions about a basic recommended setup useful for opening a pull request.
Keep in mind there are also other channels you can use to interact with AsyncAPI community. For more details check out this issue.

[derberg]

Hey, could you provide some examples on what more or less such binding would contain that is not possible to address with AsyncAPI atm? and what AsyncAPI objects need a binding.

Also pinging the only EventBridge expert that I know @boyney123

[boyney123]

Makes sense to me, maybe provide some example and we can go from there?

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity :sleeping:

It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with a detailed explanation.

There can be many reasons why some specific issue has no activity. The most probable cause is lack of time, not lack of interest. AsyncAPI Initiative is a Linux Foundation project not owned by a single for-profit company. It is a community-driven initiative ruled under open governance model.

Let us figure out together how to push this issue forward. Connect with us through one of many communication channels we established here.

Thank you for your patience :heart: