(iotevents-actions): Add missing actions

[azatoth]

Describe the feature

At the moment, we are exposing:
ClearTimerAction
LambdaInvokeAction
ResetTimerAction
SetTimerAction
SetVariableAction
TimerDuration

What are missing from DetectorModel and AlarmModel are following:

• DynamoDB
• DynamoDbv2
• Firehose
• IotEvents
• IotSiteWise
• IotTopicPublic
• Sns
• Sqs

Use Case

To allow users to use these actions vi L2 constructs.

Proposed Solution

Should be similar to how the current actions are implemented.

Other Information

No response

Acknowledgements

• I may be able to implement this feature request
• This feature might incur a breaking change

CDK version used

2.46.0

Environment details (OS name and version, etc.)

Linux

[peterwoodworth]

We'd love to support the rest of the available action @azatoth, thanks for the suggestion.

I am marking this issue as p2, which means that we are unable to work on this immediately.

Check out our contributing guide if you're interested in contributing yourself - there's a low chance the team will be able to address this soon but we'd be happy to review a PR 🙂

[azatoth]

We'd love to support the rest of the available action @azatoth, thanks for the suggestion.

I assume you meant to link to https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSCloudFormation/latest/UserGuide/aws-properties-iotevents-detectormodel-action.html as we are referring to IoTEvents actions, and currently only actions for the DetectorModel. I assume a redesign of how actions are contained might need to be addressed if/when AlarmModel (#22502) gets implemented, as they don't have the exact same set of actions.

Check out our contributing guide if you're interested in contributing yourself - there's a low chance the team will be able to address this soon but we'd be happy to review a PR slightly_smiling_face

Yea I was looking into it, but got confused about the "Design" section, which seems to indicate an accepted RFC is required for any L2 implementation.

[azatoth]

Yea I was looking into it, but got confused about the "Design" section, which seems to indicate an accepted RFC is required for any L2 implementation.

I filed a ticket for that in #22601