[lioeters]

I appreciate your perspective, as I've been considering whether to invest time into learning GraphQL. It's informative to know that it's not suitable for some use cases. Probably could have done without the inflammatory adjectives.. ;)

As far as the criticism, would you be kind enough to explain what you mean by "relay concepts", and how GraphQL failed to satisfy those needs?

[djmashko2]

I think the parent is saying something different: They were happy with GraphQL for their API, but weren't happy with the requirements the Relay client library imposed.

My interpretation is that they are now using a GraphQL API but fetching from it with regular HTTP fetches and managing data with Redux on the frontend.

[lioeters]

Aha, thanks for the clarification. Upon reading the comment again, I see that it's Relay that didn't suit his use case, not GraphQL.

[sAbakumoff]

Yes exactly, thanks for your help.

[sAbakumoff]

What's wrong with inflammatory adjectives?

[lioeters]

Well, I just imagined that the devs of the library may be come across your comment and be offended/saddened to hear it being called "ridiculous" and "stupid". But then again, it sounds like you have good reasons to be frustrated with it, so why not. I recently saw someone write, "Webpack is ridiculous" - I suppose there's nothing wrong with inflammatory adjectives if it's backed up by evidence/experience.