Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implementations may not deprecate a field that the interface hasn't deprecated #1053

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

benjie
Copy link
Member

@benjie benjie commented Nov 9, 2023

This PR addresses a spec validation omission; if an interface field is not deprecated then any implementation of that interface field should also not be deprecated. I.e. the following schema should be invalid, but before this PR it is valid:

interface Node {
  id: ID!
}

type Foo implements Node {
  id: ID! @deprecated(reason: "...")
}

type Query {
  foo: Foo
}

To solve this, either the deprecation should be removed, or the id field on Node should also be deprecated:

interface Node {
  id: ID! @deprecated(reason: "...")
}

Relevant action item: graphql/graphql-wg#1331

GraphQL.js Implementation: graphql/graphql-js#3986

Copy link

netlify bot commented Nov 9, 2023

Deploy Preview for graphql-spec-draft ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 9a5f88b
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/graphql-spec-draft/deploys/6752d017a7c434000842749a
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-1053--graphql-spec-draft.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

@fotoetienne
Copy link
Contributor

Should the graphql-js impl be part of a major release?

@leebyron leebyron added 📄 Draft (RFC 2) RFC Stage 2 (See CONTRIBUTING.md) and removed 💡 Proposal (RFC 1) RFC Stage 1 (See CONTRIBUTING.md) labels Dec 5, 2024
@mjmahone
Copy link
Contributor

mjmahone commented Dec 5, 2024

One potential wrinkle to this: we don't really have deprecated interface implementations.

Like, maybe I'm deprecating a field because I will not be implementing an interface in the future. What I'm really trying to say is:

interface Node {
  id: ID!
}

type Foo implements Node @deprecated(reason: "Node is terrible for this purpose") {
  id: ID! 
}

type Query {
  foo: Foo
}

I guess the answer here is that deprecating implements is bad and you should migrate to a new type in that case.

Copy link
Collaborator

@leebyron leebyron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

suggest rewriting to:

  • avoid directly referencing directives, but just the deprecated status directly.
  • if / then to avoid the negative

spec/Section 3 -- Type System.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Lee Byron <lee@leebyron.com>
@fotoetienne
Copy link
Contributor

maybe I'm deprecating a field because I will not be implementing an interface in the future.

I think @mjmahone has a valid point. Perhaps we don't want clients to do this anymore:

... on Foo {
    id
}

but this is still ok

... on Node {
    id
}

Marking id on foo as deprecated would indicate this.

@fotoetienne fotoetienne self-requested a review December 12, 2024 21:35
Copy link
Contributor

@fotoetienne fotoetienne left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

On further reflection, I'm thinking that this validation isn't needed. It doesn't bring enough benefit to warrant removing some deprecation capabilities.

@benjie benjie changed the title [RFC] Implementations may not deprecate a field that the interface hasn't deprecated Implementations may not deprecate a field that the interface hasn't deprecated Dec 13, 2024
@benjie
Copy link
Member Author

benjie commented Dec 13, 2024

@fotoetienne I think the general intent of deprecation (and specifically the includeDeprecated feature in introspection) is that you should be able to represent a schema with all deprecated entities removed and that schema should still be valid. Without this rule, this is not the case - if you remove the deprecated fields then Foo no longer implements Node, and the "not deprecated" schema is now invalid.

If and when we support deprecation on interface implementation as Matt suggest, this rule can be changed such that either the interface field is deprecated or the implementation of this interface is deprecated.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
📄 Draft (RFC 2) RFC Stage 2 (See CONTRIBUTING.md)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants