Conversation
|
is this working with infinte nested mutations? |
|
Yes it should be. |
|
@Eldow I'm also interested in getting this merged. There are a couple of existing integration tests that fail. I've fixed that and also added tests (which lead to a few minor changes). I have opened a PR for your fork with those changes. Would you please have a look? |
Integration tests for nested mutations support
|
Hello @andrisak thanks a lot for your contribution, it looks perfect to me :) Those are definitely relevant changes. |
|
I am really interested by this feature; when will this one be merged ? |
|
@mlipscombe Is this repo considered unmaintained now? This seems like a pretty desirable PR and hasn't had any updates since 2021 |
|
bumping this again, this would be a helpful feature. alternatively, throwing an error or warning instead of silent non-updates would save debugging time. |
|
in the meantime if you want you can try this branch: |
@mlipscombe tell me what you think about it. I will provide the tests ASAP.
I'm pretty sure there is a nicer way than
includes('updateBy')to detect an updater field in the input but I'm not very used to what's available.Linked issues :
#29
#53