Nicolas Maquet
Nicolas Maquet
Bramble doesn't currently support APQ but it sounds like a nice addition. It shouldn't be difficult to add since our GraphQL server implementation is `gqlgen` and it supports APQ out...
Hi @timspin. This isn't something that we have used / found a need for yet but it does sound interesting. As you've noticed, Bramble doesn't currently support this but we...
Yeah I think reusing `@boundary` is fine here.
> In the enum case we can union all the values from various services into the final enum, although this means that services could get values they are not expecting...
> Same with input types, if we do a union of the inputs fields then again one service can receive fields it doesn't expect. I was confused here for a...
> and then have a way to include this services schema into others as a common package? I don't think this is necessary. I think it's fine (and even preferable)...
@pkqk I totally get your point that rolling out changes to `@boundary` will be a tricky operation. I do believe, however, that centralizing the definition in one spot will make...
Happy to consider this for 2.0, thanks.
@gmac Curious to hear your thoughts on this one.
@gmac Thanks for your answer. I was definitely meaning root accessor fields used for federation access. > Not using those signatures causes avoidable problems, so requiring them nudges developers into...