Skip to content

updateCustomerV2 code style fixes #341

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 20, 2019
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -15,10 +15,10 @@ Deprecate `updateCustomer` mutation in favor of `updateCustomerV2`. `CustomerUpd

```graphql
mutation {
updateCustomerV2(input: CustomerUpdateInput!): Customer
updateCustomerV2(input: CustomerUpdateInput!): CustomerOutput
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree that it would not be consistent with existing operations. But I would only change it if we think that we may want to add more data in the future.

}

type CustomerUpdateInput {
input CustomerUpdateInput {
date_of_birth: String
dob: String
firstname: String
Expand All @@ -36,18 +36,10 @@ Deprecate `updateCustomer` mutation in favor of `updateCustomerV2`. `CustomerUpd

```graphql
mutation {
updateCustomerEmail(email: String!, password: String!): Customer
updateCustomerEmail(email: String!, password: String!): CustomerOutput
}
```

**updateCustomerPassword**

```graphql
mutation {
updateCustomerPassword(password: String!, old_password: String!): Customer
}
```


### Alternative solution

Alternative solution is to use existing field consistently for setting new customer password and introduce additional input argument for current password verification:
Expand Down