Interfaces cannot end with `Connection`

[landau]

I'm trying to create an interface that specifies what a Connection must implement. However, the rule relay-connection-types-spec prevents this from happening. The following schema seems perfectly valid to me. I would prefer to rely on my schema for ensuring my types that do end in Connection be dependent on an interface rather than a linter. Could you enable the lint the a Connection interface such that it follows the relay spec?

Thanks for your work on this project.

interface Edge {
  cursor: String!
  node: Node!
}

interface Connection {
  totalCount: Int!
  pageInfo: PageInfo!
  edges: [Edge!]!
}

[cjoudrey]

Hey @landau! Thanks for opening the issue. 😄

Just for clarity, are you saying the relay-connection-types-spec rule is preventing you from defining interface Connection or are there more issues? Will your connection types still end in Connection?

The rules implemented in relay-connection-types-spec follow what's written in the spec including:

Any type whose name ends in “Connection” is considered by Relay to be a Connection Type. Connection types must be an “Object” as defined in the “Type System” section of the GraphQL Specification.

As part of #18, I'm looking into providing a way for people to disable certain rules for specific parts of their schema a bit like what ESLint provides:

# lint-disable relay-connection-types-spec
interface Connection {
  totalCount: Int!
  pageInfo: PageInfo!
  edges: [Edge!]!
}
# lint-enable relay-connection-types-spec

Let me know if this would help.

[landau]

Just for clarity, are you saying the relay-connection-types-spec rule is preventing you from defining interface Connection or are there more issues? Will your connection types still end in Connection?

Just the former. I can't define the interface Connection or relay-connection-types-spec complains.

As part of #18, I'm looking into providing a way for people to disable certain rules for specific parts of their schema a bit like what ESLint provides:

Disabling the rule would work, but it seems to me that an interface, which is an abstract object would, should be able to define what a type of Connection must implement. I imagine that Relay itself wouldn't have a problem with types implementing a Connection.

Thanks for your time. :)

[cjoudrey]

I had never thought of having an interface called Connection. That's a really interesting idea.

When implementing relay-connection-types-spec I followed the Relay spec to the letter. That said, I wouldn't mind making an exception for interface Connection { ... } if it doesn't cause issues with Relay.

If you'd like to open a PR for this I'd be happy to review it.

You'll want to modify: https://github.com/cjoudrey/graphql-schema-linter/blob/master/src/rules/relay_connection_types_spec.js and https://github.com/cjoudrey/graphql-schema-linter/blob/master/test/rules/relay_connection_types_spec.js.

[landau]

I appreciate the openness. I'll take a stab at the implementation, probably, tomorrow.