Big gap in the GraphQL implementation: Working with M2M in the update_item mutation #14699
Replies: 1 comment
-
Heya! Thank you for taking the time to submit this request! It has been over 90 days, and this discussion has not received at least 15 votes from the community. This means that we don't feel like there's enough community interest to warrant further R&D into this topic at this time. 🧊 This request will now be closed to keep our discussions tidy. Please reach out if you have any questions! For more information, see our Feature Request Process. |
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
-
The above is impossible. It shouldn't be. There's no ability to create/set M2M IDs for primary item/foreign item on the fly in the update_X_item mutation. You are limited to updating/removing Junctions by the actual Junction ID. This strikes me as a pretty poor design choice.
It means:
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions