Add search by relationship fields

[pnodet]

Allow admin users inside a list page to search by relations text fields

[codesandbox-ci[bot]]

This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox.

To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA.

Latest deployment of this branch, based on commit e1f1bef7803362a3e10e1bc2c758abb882a2e03d:

Sandbox	Source
@keystone-6/sandbox	Configuration

[pnodet]

Hi @dcousens I see some tests failing but some are due to CI setup failure I think, not sure what to do tbh

[dcousens]

Thanks @pnodet, I'll check that out as soon as I can

[pnodet]

HNY @dcousens thanks for the formatting commit! I this PR something you are interested in? do you think this will get merged or I better publish a npm fork?

[pnodet]

@dcousens from the 58 tests the failing one seem to be related to tsx, not sure how to fix tbh

> @keystone-6/[email protected] test /home/runner/work/keystone/keystone/examples/testing
> node --loader tsx example-test.ts


node:internal/process/esm_loader:40
      internalBinding('errors').triggerUncaughtException(
                                ^
Error: tsx must be loaded with --import instead of --loader
The --loader flag was deprecated in Node v20.6.0

[dcousens]

@pnodet happy new years to you too :yellow_heart:

I'm not convinced this will be intuitive and could result in unexpected performance costs in some usecases. Can the user opt-in to the behavior?

[pnodet]

@dcousens

By user you mean end-user (ie: a checkbox with label Activate search by relation fields) or keystone user the developers in the schema for example?

[dcousens]

sorry, I mean developer (but, maybe the user too...)

[pnodet]

Sure, for the developer we could have something in the schema / list. Inside the relationship field there is already a isFilterable and isOrderable properties if I'm not mistaken. I'm not an expert and I don't quite remember how we use them but I imagine we could have another field like isSearchable for exemple, defaults to false for backward compatibility.

[pnodet]

Hi @dcousens What do you have in mind? anything I can do to get this PR merged?