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

Move Webpack Loader to its own repository #32

Closed
jtmthf opened this issue Jan 4, 2017 · 5 comments
Closed

Move Webpack Loader to its own repository #32

jtmthf opened this issue Jan 4, 2017 · 5 comments

Comments

@jtmthf
Copy link

jtmthf commented Jan 4, 2017

I've been working on the included webpack loader to add support for @import directives and am thinking that it could be worth moving the loader to its own repository. Beyond @import support I have some ideas for adding options and using the loader as a tool to incorporate persisted queries and custom scalars. As the loader becomes more complex and feature-rich, it could be worth moving to its own repository.

@stubailo
Copy link
Contributor

stubailo commented Jan 5, 2017

Just a heads up - @Poincare is working on the exact same thing right now. I do agree that it might be worth moving the loader out.

@Poincare
Copy link
Contributor

Poincare commented Jan 5, 2017

@jtmthf Agree with moving it into a separate repo eventually, just not until I get #33 merged :)

By the way, #33 implements "#import" as a set of comments since it is simpler than having to parse the actual AST of the query and pick out "@import" directives. There's also the extractgql, which is meant for persisted query support and currently provides middleware for Express as well as a persisted query network interface for Apollo Client. It is a bit undocumented right now, but that will be fixed soon.

@stubailo
Copy link
Contributor

stubailo commented Jan 5, 2017

I think once we validate #import having an @import directive on fragments would be a great next step! It could work in a very similar way.

@jnwng
Copy link
Contributor

jnwng commented Jan 31, 2017

@Poincare any updates on this? are there blockers that need to be addressed?

@jnwng
Copy link
Contributor

jnwng commented Feb 6, 2018

going to close this — please re-open if we think this needs to be separated.

@jnwng jnwng closed this as completed Feb 6, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants