Custom mutation and subscription type names

[jstaro]

Inherited a couple of JavaScript GraphQL APIs and wanting to migrate them to use Pothos.
Sadly, these APIs do not use the names Mutation and Subscription for the respective types for unknown reasons, and naturally I cannot change this after the fact without breaking every single client.

Best I have managed to do is to make my own mutationType and subscriptionType functions and disabling TypeScript errors for these, but would like to get it type safe and less hacky.

    export interface QueryFieldBuilder<Types extends SchemaTypes, ParentShape>
      extends RootFieldBuilder<Types, ParentShape, 'Query'> {}

    export interface MutationFieldBuilder<Types extends SchemaTypes, ParentShape>
      extends RootFieldBuilder<Types, ParentShape, 'Mutation'> {}

    export interface SubscriptionFieldBuilder<Types extends SchemaTypes, ParentShape>
      extends RootFieldBuilder<Types, ParentShape, 'Subscription'> {}

Haven't found a good way to work around these hard-coded names.

Anyone done anything similar?

[hayes]

Just pushed support for this. If you upgrade, you should be able to specify a name in the options for your root types. I am curious how your clients would be affected by the rename though. Most queries/responses won't contain the root type names (Most people don't use fragments on the root types, or select the __typename in the root query).

Definitely would still be a breaking change, just curious how widespread the impact of this actually is?

[jstaro]

Wow that was super fast. Thanks so much. Works great.

You raise a good question; I hadn't thought about it. Wouldn't codegen for statically typed languages potentially require to be re-run I wonder? Might be implementation dependent, but you're right that the root type names are seldom (if ever) referenced by user code.

I'm also a bit surprised this hasn't come up before; there's little reason to rename these types (and I silently curse at the authors of these APIs for doing it), but turns out it's not even discouraged, and even called out in the official GraphQL docs for some reason. Schema stitching reasons?