ppalaga commented on issue #2653: URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-quarkus/issues/2653#issuecomment-847712360
> * star moving the components to use the async bits and drop apache-http in favor of netty +1 for the direction, but I doubt we'll have time for that in the coming months. I have filed https://github.com/apache/camel-quarkus/issues/2662 > don't know if all the services we are covering in Camel have their respective Quarkus extensions. No, they do not, but I do not think it is an issue. We can leverage the ones that exist and do our stuff as we did so far with the rest. > Moving to async is an option, but I would probably create a second component for async, not all the components would have real advantages in moving to async. I wonder whether sync/async can be seen as an implementation detail? Well, probably not, as long as the user has the option to provide his custom client instance. And switching to async would be a backwards incompatible change. OTOH, having two component variants for each AWS service sounds after a lot of work and a lot of maintenance. I think we should avoid it as far as possible. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
