Github user jvwing commented on the issue:
@baank Thanks for putting together this PR, it looks like you put a lot of
thought into covering all the possible encryption scenarios. I haven't run it
yet, but I have a few starter questions after looking over some of the code:
1. What was the driver behind updating the AWS SDK version?
1. Although the service interfaces and their methods are named specific to
encryption, the substance of their interaction are not necessarily limited to
encryption. What would you think about making the interfaces more generic?
* Could the S3ClientSideEncryptionService be "S3ClientService" with
only `getClient` methods, with the `needsEncryptedClient()` logic being
performed internally by the concrete implementation
StandardS3ClientSideEncryptionService. I can see a number of use cases beyond
encryption that could be covered by a custom client factory.
* Could the S3ServerSideEncryptionService be a more generic S3 put
request modifier? My efforts at thinking up a good name failed miserably here.
But the interface allows many non-encryption modifications of an S3 request,
which might indeed be useful, despite the `encrypt()` naming of the methods.
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket