Skip to content

Fix a typo: This has lead -> This has led #543

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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 1 commit into from
Nov 15, 2018
Merged

Fix a typo: This has lead -> This has led #543

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
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
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion site/learn/BestPractice-Introduction.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ While there's nothing that prevents a GraphQL service from being versioned just

Why do most APIs version? When there's limited control over the data that's returned from an API endpoint, *any change* can be considered a breaking change, and breaking changes require a new version. If adding new features to an API requires a new version, then a tradeoff emerges between releasing often and having many incremental versions versus the understandability and maintainability of the API.

In contrast, GraphQL only returns the data that's explicitly requested, so new capabilities can be added via new types and new fields on those types without creating a breaking change. This has lead to a common practice of always avoiding breaking changes and serving a versionless API.
In contrast, GraphQL only returns the data that's explicitly requested, so new capabilities can be added via new types and new fields on those types without creating a breaking change. This has led to a common practice of always avoiding breaking changes and serving a versionless API.


### Nullability
Expand Down