Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
When generating the docs for a graphql-ruby schema, the resulting documentation includes types used for introspection such as __Type, __Field, __Directive etc. which I'd rather not have in my API documentation.
Also, I might want to hide some mutations, fields or types in the docs because I use them for internal purposes and I don't want other clients to rely on them (I know that ideally I should hide them in the schema itself, but it's not always convenient or desirable).
Describe the solution you'd like
I envision an option similar to the notices one: a user-provided proc that, given the schema member path, returns true if the member should be hidden.
To satisfy the use-case described above, one could write the option as: (feel free to choose a different/better name for the option)
options[:hide_if] = ->(schema_member_path) { schema_member_path.start_with?('__') }
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
When generating the docs for a graphql-ruby schema, the resulting documentation includes types used for introspection such as
__Type,__Field,__Directiveetc. which I'd rather not have in my API documentation.Also, I might want to hide some mutations, fields or types in the docs because I use them for internal purposes and I don't want other clients to rely on them (I know that ideally I should hide them in the schema itself, but it's not always convenient or desirable).
Describe the solution you'd like
I envision an option similar to the
noticesone: a user-provided proc that, given the schema member path, returns true if the member should be hidden.To satisfy the use-case described above, one could write the option as: (feel free to choose a different/better name for the option)