Replies: 1 comment
-
I've had another thought over this, whilst cooking, and now have a better way of working that gives me the faster turnaround I am after; I still feel there should be a better way though.
I hope this makes sense... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi all, we've made extensive use of
apollo client:codegen
to generate our types that migrating them to using the types generated bygraphql-codegen
was just too much manual workI've managed to create a rudimentary spike that shows that what I want to do is feasible(ish) ie
we used to generate
but using the
typescript
+typescript-operations
plugins (and thenear-operation-file
preset) + our codegen plugin we getand all is well (ie nothing sulks).
But I am finding testing it against our codebase quite difficult as I keep getting this error when I use yarn link to connect the development space of the plugin to the node_modules of our main application (from where I execute the codegen against some real code and not just tests)
I've checked that I only have one flavour of graphql in either repository and it is the same. Any hints or tips on how I can dev/debug this issue?
I am using the workaround as mentioned here but is a bit laborious and I wondered if the advice has since changed
#5779
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions