feat: add (record|remove)ArtworkView mutations

[dblandin]

• add recordArtworkView mutation to replace stitched version from Gravity
• new removeArtworkView mutation

Leverages API endpoints added in https://github.com/artsy/gravity/pull/18432.

[artsy-peril]

Warnings

⚠️

The V2 schema in this PR has breaking changes with Force. Remember to update the Force schema if necessary. Type 'RecordArtworkViewInput' was removed Type 'RecordArtworkViewPayload' was removed Field 'Mutation.recordArtworkView' changed type from 'RecordArtworkViewPayload' to 'RecordArtworkViewMutationPayload' Type for argument 'input' on field 'Mutation.recordArtworkView' changed from 'RecordArtworkViewInput!' to 'RecordArtworkViewMutationInput!'

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 8680810

[nickskalkin]

Cool! Left a small suggestion how to avoid breaking relay change

[nickskalkin]

Did a cool thingy @mzikherman taught me - if not sure whether schema will add a breaking change - copy new schema to clients and run yarn relay. I did it in Force and Eigen. Force doesn't complain, but Eigen does:

[ERROR] Error: ✖︎ Unknown type 'RecordArtworkViewInput'. Did you mean `RecordArtworkViewMutationInput`?

  src/app/Scenes/Artwork/Artwork.tsx:261:59
  260 │
  261 │         mutation ArtworkMarkAsRecentlyViewedQuery($input: RecordArtworkViewInput!) {
      │                                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  262 │           recordArtworkView(input: $input) {

[ERROR] Compilation failed.

[dblandin]

Thanks!! Yeah, this will cause a compilation error for sure because Eigen is explicitly referencing RecordArtworkViewInput which has been removed in this diff. I wonder though if this would also cause a runtime error? Will check on that... if this doesn't cause any runtime backwards-incompatibility, I think we could merge this in (with type name changes) and follow-up with an Eigen PR to address the compilation error.

[mzikherman]

Don't quote me on this - but I think changing the name like that, if a Relay client explicitly references the name - will indeed cause a runtime error if you merge the schema update. Give it a whirl to confirm (and we start to increase our mental model of how to think about these kinds of changes with our clients).

[nickskalkin]

Wondering, if you omit Mutation here - will it produce the schema without changes that break relay (RecordArtworkViewInput -> RecordArtworkViewMutationInput)

[dblandin]

Hmmm, now that I look closer it seems like we're a bit inconsistent with suffixing these names with Mutation in the file itself... I wonder if relay adds Mutation anyway but I'll check.