Fix issue list re: issues that have an assignee
#186
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Given the GraphQL query:
issues(filterBy: {assignee: $assignee})
It turns out that passing a query variable `"assignee": null` is NOT
equivalent to omitting the variable altogether:
- `"assignee": null` seems to filter out issues that HAVE an assignee;
- omitting `assignee` correctly returns all issues.
vilmibm
approved these changes
Dec 20, 2019
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Given the GraphQL query:
It turns out that passing a query variable
"assignee": nullis not equivalent to omitting the variable altogether:"assignee": nullseems to filter out issues that have an assignee;assigneecorrectly returns all issues.This is good to know for the future too: using
"assignee": nullwe can fetch a list of all unassigned issues, if we ever need to provide that feature.Update: ah, this behavior is even properly documented in our GraphQL schema:
Fixes #185