Correctly resolve Enum

[avivey]

See #877, #756, #444.

This changes introduces "new style enums" which are more natural to work with, having the value provided to the resolver is an enum value.
This only works with Python-Enum based enums (graphene.Enum.from_enum()) and is disabled by default (pass legacy_enum_resolver=False to enable).

There's still a bug with specifying default values to enum arguments, but that bug is in graphql-core, and there's no reasonable workaround in graphene for it. We'll need graphql-core-next to better handle enums.

In part, this change reverts #446 for new-style enums. #446 added a custom __eq__ to the underlying python-enum backing graphene-enums. Some magic in the Python stack expects that if you provide __eq__ you should also provide __hash__ (Which makes sense), rendering the resulting enum instances un-hashable.
Since having EnumInstance == EnumInstance.Value doesn't make sense in a typed world (such as GraphQL), I prefer to remove this and resolve the underlying problem instead (provide resolvers with proper values).

[avivey]

@ekampf

[ekampf]

This is a breaking change.
So I guess this would require a version major\minor change...

@syrusakbary whats your policy on such changes?

[ekampf]

@avivey let's discuss how we can make this backward-compatible.
It should work the old way by default until we make the cut to Python3...

[allardhoeve]

What is needed for this to enter master? What is breaking about the change?

[ekampf]

@allardhoeve the breaking change is that when . you have Enum arguments you'll now get the enum and not its value.
Say your enum is

class Episode(graphene.Enum):
        NEWHOPE = 4
        EMPIRE = 5
        JEDI = 6

What you're getting in graphene now wuld be Episode.NEWHOPE.value and what you'll get after is Episode.NEWHOPE

We'll work to figure out how to make this backward compatible (have a flag somewhere indicating new\old enum support)

[avivey]

@ekampf now supports old form by default.
New form only supported for the from_enum() form, because hopefully some day we can drop the class Xx(Enum): form and remove a lot of code from that.

[phalt]

@dschaller @avivey we could bundle this over the graphene3 release?

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[pngnviko]

ping

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[avivey]

I don't see an "open" button... maybe create a new branch from this commit and create new pr?

…

On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 12:06 AM Eran Kampf ***@***.***> wrote: There's no way to reopen PRs? or is it a permission Im missing? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#879?email_source=notifications&email_token=AALVTAVSTHUQ55PLWG2HHELRC4IXLA5CNFSM4GK4ZS62YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEL2SO5Y#issuecomment-586491767>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AALVTAWUASZ3IEOZRBZMJSLRC4IXLANCNFSM4GK4ZS6Q> .