Jarek Potiuk

Hmm. I thought a bit about it. And following the dicsusion in https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/25121 - I think we should not add "offficial documenation" to features that our users tested, but we...

> I feel like the situation here is slightly different as it is [officially supported by Celery](https://docs.celeryq.dev/en/stable/getting-started/backends-and-brokers/index.html#broker-overview), and presumably properly tested there. I'm not sure we want to exhaustively test...

FYI. @jedcunningham - those are the kind of problems we might expect https://github.com/apache/airflow/discussions/25486 . I feel rather uncomfortable not having any tests around it. I am not sure even how...

That comment from @o-nikolas make me think we are NOT ready to make it as an official part of our documentation. But as a blog post was mentioned several times...

I think we can close it now. We can always reopen if we think it is worthwile, but I'd bee rather sceptical on supporting SQS knowing the caveats.

FYI: I think that was a good idea to not "pretend" we support SQS when we have no tests for it. An example of interesting problem with it is here...

Needs doc update, provider update, examples.

Yeah. Using Asyncio is kinda tricky for standalone operator. It sounds a bit tricky with this approach. Seems that we are trying to start asyncio.loop to run asyncio operations and...

(And Sorry for long delays in review @schattian - we had Airflow Summit last week which kept many of the reviewers busy).

@dstandish @ashb @ephraimbuddy @jedcunningham - I think we need some of your's expert knowledge here