If you're referring to migrations of the database, one of Hasura's touted features is its "rails like" migration system. In neo4j-graphql's case, neo4j is schema-optional so migration's are generally unnecessary. I think the same applies to AppSync backed by DynamoDB. Prisma seems to have the most attention (over 10,000 github stars), but looking at the various options, it seems the least mature by a fair margin (not sure if I'm missing something or if they just do a better job marketing).
If you're referring to migrating a graphql api itself, I would argue that this is, inherently, not an issue as the structure of the spec makes API changes straightforward (just create a new field and mark the old one as deprecated).
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Last time I checked this subject, the issue was with migrations. Did they already invent migrations for GraphQL?
If you're referring to migrations of the database, one of Hasura's touted features is its "rails like" migration system. In neo4j-graphql's case, neo4j is schema-optional so migration's are generally unnecessary. I think the same applies to AppSync backed by DynamoDB. Prisma seems to have the most attention (over 10,000 github stars), but looking at the various options, it seems the least mature by a fair margin (not sure if I'm missing something or if they just do a better job marketing).
If you're referring to migrating a graphql api itself, I would argue that this is, inherently, not an issue as the structure of the spec makes API changes straightforward (just create a new field and mark the old one as deprecated).