Repository navigation
Add Fusion and Nitro projects, update Hot Chocolate - #13
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟡 Changes recommended
Several new since: "(partial)" entries will render a blank “Supported Since” value in the generated site because partial support labels are derived from the version prefix before "(partial)".
Once you've addressed the issues Copilot identified, you can request another Copilot review.
Pull request overview
Adds two new ChilliCream GraphQL Platform-related project entries (Fusion gateway and Nitro IDE) and refines the existing Hot Chocolate support matrix to better reflect current feature implementation status and updated reference links.
Changes:
- Added
FusionandNitroproject JSON entries with per-feature support data. - Updated
Hot Chocolatemetadata (repo URL, docs links) and revised support forcapabilities,field-extensions, anddeprecated-objects.
File summaries
| File | Description |
|---|---|
data/projects/nitro.json |
New IDE project entry with initial feature support coverage and notes. |
data/projects/fusion.json |
New gateway project entry with initial feature support coverage and notes. |
data/projects/hot-chocolate.json |
Updated Hot Chocolate project metadata and adjusted several feature support statuses/notes. |
Review details
Suppressed comments (2)
data/projects/nitro.json:45
sinceis set to "(partial)" without a version prefix. The generator derives the displayed label from the substring before "(partial)", so the “Supported Since” cell will be empty for this entry.
"since": "(partial)",
data/projects/nitro.json:73
sinceis set to "(partial)" without a version prefix. Because the generator uses the prefix as the displayed version label for partial support, this will show as an empty “Supported Since” value.
"since": "(partial)",
- Files reviewed: 3/3 changed files
- Comments generated: 3
- Review effort level: Lite
💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.
|
Thanks! PS: update to the "field extensions" description there: b59bcde |
Summary
capabilitiesas not supported (the service-capabilities RFC is unimplemented), markfield-extensionsas partial, add opt-in object deprecation (deprecated-objects, 16.6.1), and correct the repository URL and documentation links.Test plan
data/features/.Observation
The
field-extensionsfeature description still frames it as adding "custom metadata to fields", but its URL andRFC0tag point to graphql-spec #1162, which is about redeclaring an existing field in a type extension to add directives or arguments. The Hot Chocolate and Fusion support entries in this PR reflect that RFC behavior; the description may be worth tightening to match.